yeah... It really wasnt...
While there are many mysteries surrounding the sinking of the K141, like why the explosion wasnt investigated when it was first detected by the Peter the great, why the underwater rescue vessel had not been tested on the hull of the Kursk (which was fitted with 8 inches of acoustic rubber) and why the Russian officials lied and said first off that it was only a malfunction and that they had established communications etc. which understandably makes anything released by them in future questionable, the acoustic data recorded by several stations across alaska and europe all tally with the actual damage found on the K141.
The collision theory is rubbish, the size of the K141 in relation to a Los Angeles class or a Swiftsure class submarine, would mean the Los Angeles of Swiftsure would have been completely destroyed by the collision, if not, so damaged it would have had to surface. The reports of the Memphis being damaged are also clearly rubbish. It docked in Norway several days later, right opposite a big housing estate in Bergan, clearly visible to all and sundry. If it was damaged in an incident of this nature, i would have been hidden away in the dry dock cut into the mountain, which was only a mere hundred or so yards away in the same port, and hidden well away from prying eyes.
The torpedoing theory is also rubbish. the American MK48 torpedo, when tested by the Australian navy on a decommissioned destroyer, thats right, a destroyer, tore the ship in half, right down the middle. there was no little hole entry followed by the devastation zone, just a big explosion impact zone followed by a big crack the width of the destroyer (google it, you'll see what i mean) any MK48 torpedo that would have hit Kursk would have totally obliterated it, not just caused damage to the forward 5 sections.
The tests on the type of torpedo that were carried out in the wake of the K141's recovery, were consistant with the initial theory of the torpedo exploding in the tube. Multiple tests were carried out by using explosives under the torpedo, dropping the torpedo, lighting fires under the torpedo etc, and could not replicate the explosion in any way externally. This means the initial explosion could have only come from inside the torpedo tube, and the only source of this explosion logically, is a leak in the HTP (High Test Peroxide) reservoir which mixed with a substance that caused the rapid expansion of pressure and heat within the torpedo tube.
This in turn caused a fire that super heated the forward cabin to a temp of between 2000 and 5000 degrees, which in turn caused the fatal explosion of the other 4-8 torpedoes.
Either that, or it was due to a 'Shkval' torpedo misfiring. a 'Shkval' is a supercavitating torpedo that reduces water resistance by producing a gas bubble around the torpedo, which minimises water resistance. The Shkval is rocket powered and can likely achieve speeds in excess of 370 MPH, making it almost impossible to defend against.
It is theorised that the rocket motor fired whilst still in the tube and before the tube had been flooded, causing the first explosion picked up by the acoustic data when the hatch door was blown off (the hatch door was found embedded into the rear bulkhead of the torpedo room confirming the was some sort of explosion in the tube) this then superheated the chamber and caused a number of the remaining conventional torpedoes to 'cook off' and explode
This was the event that registered 3.5 on the richter scale and was picked up over several thousand miles.
Of course, the Russian government has never actually announced that they were testing a new type of shkval that day, but then, if they were, they would hardly announce it, even after the accident.
Occum's razor suggests that the simplest answer is most often the correct one. And i'm afraid, that in the case of the K141, this actually is the case. Somewhere between the official HTP explosion explaination and the unofficial Shkval explosion theory, is likely the truth. But either way, have no doubt that it WAS a torpedo explosion in the tube that caused the Kursk's sinking, both the acoustic and the physical evidence prove that beyond doubt.
Although given the Russian governments attempt at covering things up and lying at the beginning of the whole saga, i can totally understand why people think there is more to it that.