MovieChat Forums > The Hunt for Red October (1990) Discussion > Why did the captain inform moscow of his...

Why did the captain inform moscow of his defection?


I mean the Soviets naturally started to assume The Red October wasn't actually destroyed despite what the Americans told the Soviet ambassador, and so the Soviets started to look for it right? Which is why at the end of the movie the Americans hid it in a river.

Why couldn't this have been done without the "ruse" to make the Soviet order the hunt for the submarine?
If Marko hadn't sent his letter to inform Moscow of his defection, then the soviets would probably not have realized the red October had defected before it was too late to find it, and the Americans would have had plenty of time to hide it and then just tell the soviets they never received the Red october.

The only thing that makes sense with the letter was the Cortes reference I guess, but the officers seemed to be committed already. Marko took a big and unnecessary gamble which he barely escaped by sending his letter....

Please discuss.

reply

I mean the Soviets naturally started to assume The Red October wasn't actually destroyed despite what the Americans told the Soviet ambassador, and so the Soviets started to look for it right? Which is why at the end of the movie the Americans hid it in a river.


Book - They eject a reactor or missile silo (don't remember which) in to the ocean, then go back with the rescue sub and film it. This is proof enough that the RO has sunk.

Movie - The Russians don't know because the other sub sank as well. But, since there was no proof that the Americans even knew about RO until the Russians asked for help in sinking her, and no proof the Americans got to Ramius, then there is no way the Russians could accuse the US of doing anything. So, the Russians could look all they want, but never would find her.

The only thing that makes sense with the letter was the Cortes reference I guess, but the officers seemed to be committed already. Marko took a big and unnecessary gamble which he barely escaped by sending his letter....


Book - It was an insult to the Russian government. Ramius blamed them for the loss of his wife. It was also motivation for his crew to not turn back.

Move - It was motivation for his crew to not turn back. They couldn't kill Ramius and then sail back to port and say it was all his fault. They would have all spent years in Siberia even if the government believed them. But, since Ramius hand-picked all of his crew it would cast doubts on their credibility. Remember, the one officer said, "We can go back!" and that is when Ramius said, "There will be no going back."

Also, he sent the letter with the knowledge that at some point he'd be chased. He wasn't flying a MIG to an air-force base, he was bringing the US a nuclear sub. At best, once he missed the rendezvous for the war games, they'd launch a search party. Most likely, if they find nothing, they'll suspect he's gone AWOL. (They would suspect nothing because of no distress signals, explosions, or radiation in the water.)

At that point, they'd go after him just like they did.

reply

Book - They eject a reactor or missile silo (don't remember which) in to the ocean, then go back with the rescue sub and film it. This is proof enough that the RO has sunk.

Reactors cannot be "ejected" These are not Star Trek Warp Cores.


Nor can the Silo be ejected.
What they did was jettison the MISSILE itself out of the silo... the missile being the one the GRU Cook was screwing around with. They did not know how far along he got in sabotaging it and got rid of it for safety's sake.



I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

Reactors cannot be "ejected" These are not Star Trek Warp Cores.


Been a long time since I read the book, and it isn't like it makes much of a difference - the point was the same.

reply

I understand it has been a long time and you dont remember the details... THAT is perfectly understandable.

That you even entertained the mere idea of "ejecting a reactor" is utter nonesense to be ridiculed.

No offense.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

That you even entertained the mere idea of "ejecting a reactor" is utter nonesense to be ridiculed.


No. Not so much. Not when I'm not presenting myself as an expert on nuclear reactors or submarines.

There is a reason why you have issues with so many posters, and it is because you don't put things out as clarifications. You put things out there as insults.

Don't worry, you aren't hurting my feelings. But, under the heading of, "More flies with honey...", you really hurt your ability to have a good conversation with someone and convince them your side is right.

reply

That's the thing.... You don't need to be an expert on nuclear reactors for that to be a ridiculous notion.

reactors are huge, monstrously heavy things, permanently installed into a sub. Even to refuel them requires cutting open her hull. Again... even the idea of "ejecting" them is silly as hell.




As for the rest... you're right. but part of that is on the reader's interpretaion and out of my control.
For example. I never called YOU stupid. I called the idea you put forth was stupid.

You can read my posts in one of two ways... An angry, vein-popping rant....
Or a good natured chuckle and a "Dude, what were you thinking."

I was not angry or ranting... Just pointing out how silly your idea was.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

I was not angry or ranting... Just pointing out how silly your idea was.


I'm not going to lose sleep over it, but you don't come across as such.

reply

Thats on you. Never my intent.

Trust me, when I do go off on some moron .... you'll know it.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

The reason FOR sending the letter was twofold, as already mentioned...

1) it burned their bridges behind them in case any of the officers changed their minds about defecting.
2) Ramius wanted the Soviet government to KNOW that he did this to them. He wanted to HURT them as they had hurt him with the senseless death of his wife.


As far as the rest of your post... much of it is much greater explained in the Novel (and it really was a quite elaborate ruse) And a lot of the confusion is because the Film has been altered from the novel

The Soviets concluded that Red October, along with Ramius and most of the Officers were lost and were considered Heroes of the Soviet Union. the Letter was deemed a fake, not sent by Ramius but by those perpetrating an elaborate hoax.

1) They had most all of the crew back and were able to interrogate them to their satisfaction. To a Man, not one of the crew knew of the defection plot and at all times they believed Captain Ramius acted to defend the ship and prevent her capture, And there were the faked orders saying they were to travel to Cuba.

2) The Soviets rode down as an observer in a Deep research sub where they saw debris from an exploded Sub, and recovered a depth gauge with serial numbers matching the Red October, and an SS-N-20 Seahawk Nuclear Missile. The Missile was ejected from Red October and was the missile that the Cook was trying to sabotage. The Depth gauge was was taken from the Red October and planted in the wreckage to be "found".

The CIA... though they already knew the truth... started asking questions all around Europe and other contacts, trying to investigate what happened with Red October. This got other intelligence agencies like Mossad, etc... to start asking their own questions as to what was going on. of course this gets back to KGB. Of course an agency is not going to investigate and ask questions of their own operation... so KGB concluded that the CIA had no part and was as in the dark as everyone else.

When you take everything in total... KGB and the Soviets concluded that Red October and the Soviet government were the victims of a massive prank. The Letter to Padorin, and the Orders to Red October were fakes. That Ramius acted in the face of sabotage to keep his Sub out of American hands by scuttling the sub with him and his officers aboard, after insuring the crew got off.


You really ought to read the Novel... there is SO MUCH MORE to it than the film could ever get into.


Another way the Film differs from the Novel...

I mean the Soviets naturally started to assume The Red October wasn't actually destroyed despite what the Americans told the Soviet ambassador, and so the Soviets started to look for it right? Which is why at the end of the movie the Americans hid it in a river.


That actually takes place BEFORE the encounter with the Alfa Sub, Konovolov. Not after.. Not at the end of the story.

They get the crew off, blew up a decommissioned American Sub in Red October's place (The Russian crew did not see the Konovolov explode, but the US Sub. Had the fight with the Cook and ejected the missile.


Then Red October, accompanied by TWO American Subs.. Dallas, and Pogy.... took shelter in Ocrakoke Inlet, Pamlico Sound. flooded down and sat on the bottom for a few days while the Soviet fleet went home after determining the Red October was destroyed.
THIS is when Cdr Mancuso, Jonesy, and several other members of Dallas' crew came aboard. After they reached shelter, not with the DSRV's in the ocean when getting the crew off. Only Ryan and a British Officer (Ryan staged from HMS Invincible and never flew out to Dallas) came aboard during the crew removal.

Soviet satellites detected the heated water variance of three nuclear Subs sitting on the bottom of a shallow bay and concluded that an American Ohio class and two Los Angeles class escorts were sitting out in safety while the Soviets were off the American coast. When the Soviets withdrew, one Alfa class, The Konovolov was tasked to remain behind for the rare opportunity to try and track the American Ohio.

When he encountered them... Captain Tupolev realized that the "Ohio" was in fact Red October and attacked.

Konovolov was sunk by the Red October ramming him... not by their own torpedo.








I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

Thanks for that answer, the book truly seems to be a bit of a masterpiece, it sounded very much like a typical John Grisham novel with its twists and turns and games of confusion.

But this I just dont think it makes sense (from the movie point of view). Ramius had no idea how everything was going to turn out in the end, so to me, the letter was still a massive unnecessary risk.
The end results were going to be the same regardless of the ruse.
The Americans would hide the sub and the Soviets would use satellites and spies to look for it at every American port, regardless if it had disappeared during its mission, or was claimed to be "destroyed" during the hunt.

I dont know much about the marine, but to me it sounds like Red October would have gotten far enough before the Russian navy would decide to send everything to find it, it sounded like the very reason the soviet sent everything they had to find it was because they knew what Ramius was planning.
Had the submarine simply missed its intended rendezvous point, and instead kept going for the American coast, they would have gotten close enough before the Soviets could truly try to stop it. As said in the movie, the coast was only a day away.

But yeah as a matter of principle it made sense, to avenge his wife, and for the officers to be fully committed... but I seriously doubt that their options of turning back looked any better with or without the letter. They were handpicked by the captain! that means they were in it from the start and would likely have been lined up against the wall and shot even if they had second thoughts.

Like you said, the novel might explain the ruse better, but in the movie, it just felt like the situation didn't call for it (from a tactical perspective). The soviets were not just going to accept the information given to them. The red october would be continuously hunted even after it had reached American soil, regardless if it had went missing at sea, or destroyed during an attempt to defect. The outcome would have been the same.

reply

But this I just dont think it makes sense (from the movie point of view).


There is a lot that doesn't make sense from a film point of view. in fact a great many cases of alterations and/or omissions beteewn novel and film do more than just leave one confused... but actually create goofs where none existed in the novel.

The DSRVs for one. In the novel Ramius was directed by morse code blinker to proceed to a set of coordinates. There they met with a small surface task group while still being shadowed by Dallas.
Two DSRVs were used, both Avalon and Mystic, not just one, and they were launched from USNS Pigeon... the DSRVs support ship, which brought them to the scene and met up with the British task group. Ryan was never aboard Dallas. He transferred from Invincible to Pigeon by Helo. Then he boarded Red October along with a British Officer who spoke Russian.

The film vesion creates a goof as Dallas had no time to go back home to port, enter drydock, get fitted with the DSRV and return to the scene.

Another alteration that creates a goof was switching from blowing a decommed American boat to simulate Red October's destruction, to dropping a torpedo from a helo then self destructing it before it hit.

A Wireguided torpedo can be command detonated... but there are no wireguided air dropped torpedoes. the wire would break upon entering the water. Air dropped torpedoes on on their own with no ability to alter their targeting, or prematurely detonate them after launch. Even Sub launched wire guided torpedoes required restricted manuevering on the part of the firing sub, and even then there is a decent chance of wire breakage.


I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

Probably the single biggest reason is that it wouldn't have been a fun chase book/movie had it not been for the letter.

reply

If the captain had not informed his superior(s) in Moscow, the Russian fleet would not have gone after him. There wouldn't have been a movie.

reply

And the crew wouldn't have been motivated to save their own azzes. By actually sending the letter, the Russian navy actually goes after them. Because of that, the crew knows they can't just turn around and go back. They know Ramius wasn't bluffing, so they'd better do everything in their power to make sure they get to America.

reply

He wanted to make sure that none of them could go back and that they would either have to succeed in their defection or die.

reply

Remember after the address the Ryan gave to the Generals, Admiral, and Jeffery Pelt, the national security adviser, that when he came to the realization that he could possibly defect. He went on to explain Ramius' possible motives including that the current day was the one year anniversary of his wife's death and that the Russian guy that received the letter was her uncle. Now this next bit may or may not have been in the movie but was in the book. So in the book it explains that she was injured in some accident and went to the hospital, the doctor either preformed the wrong procedure or didn't know what to do which ended up with her dying. Ramius wanted justice for the incompetence of the doctor but the government wouldn't do anything because his father was a high ranking official in the government. So him writing the letter that explained why he left and that he was going to give the sub to the Americans was the biggest 'Screw You' statement he could give. Also the insult made even more impact in that he let them know he defected and such and they still got away with it.

Honorary Knight of Arendelle
Half-Blood #18 and Son of Poseidon, Son of Adam, Gryffindor 7th year

reply

I think the accident was caused by a drunk driver who was not going to be charged because of his connections, the doctor was incompetent and wouldn't be charged because of his connections, the medicine was defective but there would be no investigation into the state factory that produced the defective medicine, and since the USSR pushed atheism, it removed Ramius' ability to see his wife in the next life.

Yes, he was adding insult to injury.

reply

I think the accident was caused by a drunk driver who was not going to be charged because of his connections

Incorrect. There was no drunk driver, Ramius' wife had Appendicitis

the doctor was incompetent and wouldn't be charged because of his connections

Correct. And it was the Doctor that was drunk, not some drunk driver.

the medicine was defective but there would be no investigation into the state factory that produced the defective medicine

Correct

and since the USSR pushed atheism, it removed Ramius' ability to see his wife in the next life.

Correct.



Your only mistake was in thinking that Ramius' wife was hit by a drunk driver.
You are conflating two separate sections of the story. The Doctor was drunk, and Skip Tyler, Ryan's buddy he takes the photos to and who figures out the doors are for a caterpillar drive, was clipped by a drunk driver.


I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

Ok, thanks for the correction. I haven't read the book in twenty years or so.

reply