International Naval News & Discussion

[Philip]

Vietnam's Kilos to be armed with land attack Klubs.
China may fret and fume,but they too acquired Russian Kilos,earlier versions,so can't wave their fists in Russia's face.This is a v.good strat. move for both India and Vietnam,as their sub fleet will cause a headache for the PLAN.India training the Viet navy on their Kilos will see Vietnam becoming an "all-weather friend" just as China plays Pak against us. India must further cement its mil relationship with Vietnam by selling it Prithvi,Prahar,Akash and other tactical and land attack missiles
and also provide N-tech,a N-plant so that eventually Vietnam can develop...if it wishes,its own N-deterrent against China.

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-eas ... -submarine
Vietnam risks provoking China by arming expanded submarine fleet with land attack missiles

http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/vietnam- ... ing-china/

Vietnam Buys Deadly New Missiles Capable of Hitting China
Hanoi is the first Southeast Asian nation arming its submarines with land attack cruise missiles.

By Franz-Stefan Gady
April 30, 2015

Vietnam is in the process of acquiring 50 anti-ship and land attack 3M-14E Klub supersonic cruise missiles for its burgeoning fleet of SSK Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines, Der Spiegel Online reports.

According to the article, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) recently updated data on its website, based on information obtained from the United Nations’ register of conventional arms, indicating that Russia has already delivered 28 missiles over the last two years to Hanoi, although the precise number remains unknown.

The Klub is a Russian-made conventional supersonic cruise missile, “designed to destroy targets protected by sophisticated active air defenses and countermeasures,” deagel.com explains. It is an export variant of Russia’s “carrier killer” 3M-54 (NATO designation: SS-N-27A “Sizzler”) and capable of long-range precision strikes.

While it is unknown whether the anti-ship variant of the weapon sold to Vietnam is the 3M-54E Klub-S (range 220km) or 3M-54E1 (range 300km) – both of which can be launched from submarines – the land-attack variant is almost certainly the 3M-14E (range 300km), capable of carrying a 450kg warhead.

The purchase of land attack cruise missiles mark a “massive shift” beyond advancing the Vietnamese’s Navy’s anti-ship capabilities, according to naval analyst Carl Thayer quoted by Reuters. “They’ve given themselves a much more powerful deterrent that complicates China’s strategic calculations,” he added.

Principal targets for the new missile could be the Chinese naval base at Sanya on China’s Hainan Island and military facilities (e.g., ports and airfields) that China is building in the potentially oil-rich South China Sea (see: “South China Sea: China’s Unprecedented Spratlys Building Program”).

The launch platforms for Vietnam’s new weapons will be six 4,000-ton Type 636 Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines – labelled “black holes” by the U.S. Navy due to their quietness, according to UNSI News.

The website naval-technology.com notes about the Type 636 Kilo-class:

Type 636 is designed for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and anti-surface-ship warfare (ASuW) and also for general reconnaissance and patrol missions. The Type 636 submarine is considered to be to be one of the quietest diesel submarines in the world. It is said to be capable of detecting an enemy submarine at a range three to four times greater than it can be detected itself.

The Vietnamese Navy has already commissioned two Kilo-class vessels – the HQ-182 Hanoi and HQ-183 Ho Chi Minh City – in 2014, while it received the third sub, the HQ-184 Haiphong, in February of this year.

Reuters states that the fourth Kilo-class vessel is already in transit to Vietnam, with a fifth undergoing seal-trials in St. Petersburg and the sixth and last to be completed and delivered in 2016. Hanoi and Moscow signed a $ 2.6 billion contract for the modernization of Vietnam’s submarine fleet back in 2009.

Once the last vessel is commissioned, Vietnam will have the most modern submarine force in all of Southeast Asia. Its principal purpose will be to act as a credible deterrent force to Chinese “adventurism” in Vietnam’s maritime domain.

However, as Carl Thayer noted in The Diplomat (see: “Can Vietnam’s Maritime Strategy Counter China?”) it remains to be seen whether Vietnam can develop new doctrines and tactics to use its new weapon platforms, and how quickly the Vietnamese Navy can integrate its new fleet of submarines into the country’s overall counter-intervention strategy vis-à-vis Beijing.

“The views of defense analysts range from skeptical to cautiously optimistic about Vietnam’s ability to develop an effective counter-intervention strategy to deter China in Vietnam’s maritime domain,” Thayer summarizes.

He concludes:

The purpose of Vietnam’s counter-intervention strategy is intended to deter China from deploying PLAN warships at the lower end of the conflict spectrum, such as assisting civilian law enforcement agency vessels operating in Vietnamese waters or blockading Vietnamese-held islands and features in the South China Sea.

Likely targets

Likely targets

Rather than risk an attack on cities such as Shanghai, it is more likely Vietnam would see closer ports and airfields, such as the naval base at Sanya on China's Hainan Island and facilities on land reclamations China is building in the South China Sea, as potential targets, Thayer said.

While communist parties rule both Vietnam and China, Hanoi has long been wary of China, especially over Beijing's claims to most of the potentially oil-rich South China Sea.

Beijing's placement of an oil rig in waters claimed by Vietnam last year sparked riots in Vietnam and infuriated Hanoi's leadership. Its coast guard ships and fishing boats were routinely chased away by larger Chinese ships during the stand-off.

The two navies routinely eye each other over disputed holdings in the sea's Spratly islands, which straddle some of the world's busiest shipping lanes.

Before obtaining the latest weapons, Hanoi's previous land attack capabilities were limited to a handful of ageing Scud missiles and more limited weapons fired by Russian-built Su-30 aircraft.

Vietnam's navy has taken possession of three Russian-built Kilos and a fourth is in transit under a $2.6 billion deal struck with Moscow in 2009, according to Vietnamese state press reports. A fifth is undergoing sea-trials off St Petersburg and a final sixth submarine is due for completion in 2016.

SIPRI has logged the sale of 50 anti-ship and land attack Klubs to Vietnam as part of the deal, with 28 having been delivered already over the last two years. The precise number of land attack missiles it has bought is not publicly available.

Moscow-based strategic analyst Vasily Kashin said the Kilos sold to Vietnam are more advanced than those used by China while Moscow has never sold the Klub land attack missile to Beijing, which has developed its own similar weapon, the YJ-18.

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/47 ... eter-china

[Philip]

China's Han class SSN too noisy.But diesel subs much quieter.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... -say-naval

China's pirate patrol submarine is too noisy, say naval experts
PUBLISHED : Sunday, 03 May, 2015
Type 091 and 092 nuclear submarines. Photo: SMP
China's recent deployment of a nuclear submarine for an antipiracy mission in the Gulf of Aden may have caused unease among its neighbours, but naval experts say the Type 091 vessel is unlikely to pose any real threat because of the noise it generates.

The experts say the international community should instead keep an eye on China's quieter, more advanced diesel-driven submarines.

CCTV's military channel last Sunday reported that a nuclear submarine from the People's Liberation Army Navy had completed a two-month escort mission in the pirate-infested waters of the Gulf of Aden, and returned to its base in Qingdao , Shandong province.

The report did not specify the type of submarine used, but commentators said the footage suggested it was an updated version of a Type 091 submarine.

It was the first time state media had confirmed China was deploying nuclear submarines for anti-piracy missions in the seas between Yemen and Somalia, although it had long been suggested by overseas media.

"CCTV's report … shows that the PLA Navy really wants to improve its transparency in answer to US criticism [that it was not being transparent enough]," Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong said.

"But the key reason that pushed the PLA Navy to increase its transparency is because the Type 091 subs are so easily detected by the US navy, although CCTV did not report this."

The Type 091, which the US calls a Han-class submarine, is designed to seek out and destroy enemy vessels in deep waters.

A March 2007 issue of Seapower Magazine - an official publication of the Navy League of the US - referred to such vessels as "relatively noisy submarines based on 1950s and 1960s technology", although it admitted the models had benefited from several upgrades over the years.

Belgian naval analyst Frederik Van Lokeren wrote on his blog that the Type 091 had "no combat value and can only be … used for training purposes".

But Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said China had spared no effort to reduce its noise problem, developing several improved versions over the four decades since the first generation of the nuclear submarine was launched in December 1970.

"The PLA Navy now has Type 092, and 093 and 094 ballistic-missile subs that are more advanced than the Type 091 series," Li said.

"The navy's trials in the past two decades showed that Type 091 subs were not as noisy as the US media described, although we should recognise that the decibel level of the Type 091 subs is not as [low] as US samegeneration vessels like USS Ohio nuclear subs."

Li said even though they were about 20 years behind US vessels, the Type 091 submarines still posed a threat to US aircraft carriers.

During the 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis, two PLA Navy Type 091 submarines tracked two aircraft carrier groups led by the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Independence. He said they pushed the US carriers back 200 miles.

Macau-based naval expert Wong said while China's more advanced Type 093 vessels had yet to overcome their noise problems, the PLA Navy's diesel-electric submarines had achieved an advantage that could pose a significant threat to the international community.

"China's diesel-powered subs have reached international standard … They are equipped with air-independent propulsion and can remain silent during underwater ambushes," Wong said.

In October 1995, a Type 039 Song-class diesel-powered submarine sailed close to the USS Independence carrier group without being detected by the US navy until it suddenly surfaced from the waters near the Taiwan Strait, according to a documentary broadcast by Guangdong Satellite TV last month.

The elusiveness of Type 039 vessels has helped China increase its share of the weapons market. Last month, Pakistan's media reported that the country would buy eight such submarines for US$5 billion, making it China's largest single sale of submarines.
This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Pirate patrol submarine too noisy, say experts

[member_28911]

And caused the accident in the release landing during training in Kochi Prefecture, off the coast on April 28, it sank over Maritime Self-Defense Force Iwakuni Air Base (Yamaguchi Prefecture Iwakuni) had affiliation of rescue flying boat is "US2", around the 1st noon, full It was submerged. According to the MSDF, it was scheduled to carry out the work and pulled in after that date. And to consider whether or not to perform the work in the future.

　When in this accident that the US2 tried to fly away, engine 1 group of right wing fall off. In flooded on board, it had been sinking from the nose into the sea. 19 people member crew has been all rescued, five people suffered minor injuries such as bruises.

http://www.sankei.com/west/news/150501/ ... 58-n1.html

[brar_w]

[Philip]

A pic taken at night of the suspected "Russian" sub off the Finnish coast ,adding to the recent "Russians are coming" scaremongering,clearly shows that the sub in question is a Swedish
Vastergotland /Sondermanland class sub,from the distinct kink in the rear of the sail. One can check this out comparing the pic of the sub and sub type. The earlier Swedish sub scare alleging that the pic of a "scope" was that of a Russian sub ,was later officially said to be that of a fishing boat!

http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150504/1021692476.html

An unknown submarine was captured on camera, sailing off the coast of Finland, local media reported Monday.

The picture was taken by a fisherman on board a Finnish trawler in international waters southwest of the capital Helsinki. The fisherman, who asked not to be named, said the sub was 800 meters away and heading east.

“Submarines use certain types of signals when they are surfaced and, moving closer, we could clearly see its silhouette,” he added.

Meanwhile, Finnish Coast Guard officials said the snapshot gave no reason for worry.

“Submarines are built at St. Petersburg shipyards and are often tested off Gotland Island in the Baltic, Finnish Coast Guard Commander Ismo Siikaluma told Yle.

© Flickr/ Richard John Pozon

Stockholm Syndrome: Finland Starts Seeing 'Secret Submarines'
Last week the Finnish Navy reportedly bombed an “underwater target” off the coast of Helsinki. Defense Minister Carl Haglund later said that it could have been a submarine, which had left the area shortly afterwards.

In Moscow Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov dismissed reports of Russian submarines allegedly prying into the territorial waters of European countries as an element of the information war being waged against Russia by the West.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150504/ ... z3ZGRuCW2c

Vastergotland/Sodermanland class sub:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B6der ... _submarine

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world ... -the-world
Russia unveils the Krasnodar — what it claims will be ‘the quietest submarine in the world’
Business Insider | May 4, 2015

Excellent pic of the rear of the latest Russian Kilo class sub,unique in that it does not have a vertical fin at the tail.Good view of the 7-bladed screw too.

[Philip]

Resurgence in seaplanes/amphibians. Good details about the US-2 and BE-200,the most popular of amphibs around. The point about the BE-200ASW version is moot,as it would give a navy equipped with such an aircraft an extended ASW capability apart from regular MRP aircraft.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnava ... 50502.aspx

Naval Air: The Seaplane Resurgence
Next Article → IRAN: Know Who Your Friends Are

May 2, 2015: In the last decade there has been a resurgence of interest in seaplanes. Thus it was no surprise when in early 2015 a Chinese firm announced it was building a new seaplane, the AG600. At 53 tons this is larger than previous Chinese seaplane like the 1980s era SH-5. Only seven of these 45 ton SH-5s were built; three prototypes and four production models meant for anti-submarine warfare. These seaplanes were not found to be all that useful in hunting subs and one of the SH-5s has since been converted to fight forest fires. The AG600 is described as ideal for SAR (Sea Air Rescue) and fighting fires. China’s neighbors see a more sinister use. If AG600s were assigned to SAR work several could justifiably be stationed in South China right on the South China Sea. In the body of water there are hundreds of islets, reefs and atolls that that China claims, despite closer nations already having prior claims. The AG600s could be used to move supplies, weapons and military personnel to reinforce the growing number of small outposts China is building on platforms and artificial islands (formed by dredging sand from reefs or shallow water). Even without the AG600 China is following a strategy of “if our soldiers are on it the rock/reef/whatever is ours.” The SH-5 could carry ten tons and the AG600 is believed capable of carrying nearly twice that. Another Chinese manufacturer is also developing twin engine seaplanes as well as a four engine model similar to the AG600.

In 2014 India announced it was buying 15 US-2 seaplanes from Japan. Discussions over this sale have been going on since 2011. The growing tension with China has made India eager to increase ties with Japan, where China is also a threat. Technically air-sea rescue aircraft, the US-2s will be based in the Nicobar and Andaman Islands, which are in the Indian Ocean just west of Indonesia. This would enable the Indians to more easily patrol the western approaches to the Malacca Straits. Each year, half the world’s oil shipments, and a third of all commerce, pass through these straits. India fears that China may use its growing fleet to dominate the waters around the straits. The US-2s will make it easier to keep an eye on the Chinese.

The US-2 is a 43 ton, four engine amphibious maritime patrol aircraft that can carry twenty passengers, 12 stretchers or a ton of cargo. Japan uses them for search and rescue and uses a crew of eleven for these missions. Maritime patrol is similar and the aircraft has a sea-search radar as well as viewing ports for the crew. Cruising speed is 480 kilometers an hour and max endurance is about nine hours. The US-2s cost $110 million each and it would be up to India to arm them as the Japanese constitution forbids the export of weapons.

In 2013 the Russian Defense Ministry bought six Be-200 jet powered seaplanes, for about $40 million each. Most seaplanes use turboprop engines and using jets makes available a faster seaplane that can carry more. The Be-200 was developed in the 1990s, using a combination of Russian and Western technology. It first flew in 1998, and over a dozen are on order configured as fire-fighting aircraft. This was the main reason it was designed in the first place. This model can carry twelve tons of water (which it could scoop from a river in 12 seconds). The 43 ton aircraft can carry seven tons of cargo or 72 passengers. The aircraft was offered in an anti-submarine configuration but there were no takers. Built to fly low and slow (it cruises at 500 kilometers an hour), the Be-200 was ideal for anti-submarine warfare. It is unclear what the Russian military intends to do with it. Because most of Russia lacks roads and airfields, but has plenty of rivers and lakes, the Be-200 would greatly increase rapid access to many of these areas, especially those beyond the range of helicopters. Current endurance is about four hours per sortie. This can be increased by using some of the cargo capacity for additional fuel, to get endurance up to eight hours or more.

A seaplane is more expensive to build and maintain, but these aircraft can land and take off from the water and be stationed anywhere along the coast (or up a river). During World War II amphibious maritime reconnaissance aircraft often took advantage of this and were very useful in the Pacific. Currently only Russia, China, Japan and Canada build seaplanes like this and Russia is an enthusiastic backer of these amphibious aircraft.

[Singha]

has the land attack Klub ever been tested ? I thought it was just 3 models - one a ASW missile that drops a light torpedo, and the other two are subsonic ASM and subsonic-supersonic ASM(we got this model).

[Philip]

SoKo's U-214 AIP sub launched.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/12890 ... UylPsuJhjo

South Korea Unveils Sixth 1,800 Ton Class Attack Submarine

Thursday, May 7, 2015
South Korea named sixth 1,800 ton class sub honoring freedom fighter, Yu Gwan-Sun (Photo:cantate-domino blog)

South Korea unveiled its sixth 1,800-ton-class attack submarine Thursday aimed at boosting its underwater warfare capabilities against North Korea, Yonhap News Agency reported.

The Navy plans to commission the submarine in November 2016, it said.

"It is the first submarine bearing a woman's name in our history," the Navy said in a statement. "We've christened it Yu Gwan-sun, to honor her sacrifice and to promote public security awareness, marking the 70th anniversary of independence from Japan's colonial rule and the establishment of the Navy."

According to the Navy, the ship is armed with indigenous ship-to-ship cruise missiles named Haeseong, or Sea Star, and torpedoes and mines for anti-vessel and anti-submarine operations.

The cruise missiles with a maximum range of 1,500 kilometers are capable of carrying out precision strikes against enemies' key facilities.

The sub's maximum underwater speed is 20 knots, which enables it to travel between South Korea and Hawaii without refueling.

The diesel-powered submarine will be operated by Air Independent Propulsion, which bolsters the vessel's submerged endurance and allows the crew to carry out underwater missions for up to two weeks without access to atmospheric oxygen.

Currently, the Navy operates nine 1,200-ton submarines and four 1,800-ton subs, while planning to build five more 1,800-ton submarines by 2019. In addition, it plans to deploy nine 3,000-ton submarines capable of launching ballistic missiles, starting in 2020.

North Korea has a significant superiority in the number of submarines, as is believed to have some 70 vessels, including about 20 1,800-ton Romeo-class submarines. The communist country is also believed to be building a new submarine capable of firing missiles, according to South Korean and US intelligence.

[Philip]

Amazing! Scuttling such important assets as two amphibs.talk about "cutting your nose to spite your face"!
However,this report has it that France may sell to China the Mistrals! For they US,"from the frying pan into the fire".Why can't the IN seriously look at the two Mistrals? We anyway need 4 amphibs.These are finished and would be immediate assets even if they are not as capable as the multi-role Spanish Juan Carlos amphibs..

Ck the link for the pics,esp. of the 100,000t carrier model with naval T-50s
Russia’s 5 Most Deadly Naval Weapons as Seen by US Media
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/world/20150509/1 ... z3ZngIOgte

World
16:46 09.05.
After having analyzed why the US should fear Russia's new Armata T-14 tank, the US bimonthly magazine The National Interest has come up with another list, this time it is “The Russian Navy's 5 Most Deadly Weapons of War”: here is what it claims the US should be concerned about.

Among the most feared weapons is an improved version of the Varshavyanka-class (Project 636.3) submarine (NATO reporting name is Improved Kilo-class). It is a multipurpose, low-noise and highly maneuverable submarine.

Armed with 18 torpedoes and eight surface-to-air Club missiles, Project 636.3 submarines are mainly intended for anti-shipping and anti-submarine missions in relatively shallow waters. They have an extended combat range and can strike surface, underwater and land-based targets.


A diesel-powered Varshavyanka-class submarine during the celebrations of the Russian Navy Day in Vladivostok

© Sputnik/ Vitaliy Ankov

A diesel-powered Varshavyanka-class submarine during the celebrations of the Russian Navy Day in Vladivostok

Submarines produce a low acoustic signature and, therefore, are most suitable for littoral warfare where their presence can be easily masked against the shallow sea bed.

Four of the six submarines, the Novorossiysk, the Rostov-on-Don, the Stary Oskol and the Krasnodar have been already been launched.

The last two submarines, the Veliky Novgorod and the Kolpino are to join the fleet by 2016. The submarines are built for Russia’s Black Sea fleet, allowing it to protect the country’s interests in the Mediterranean.

Another Item on the List is the Type 677 Lada-class, also Referred to as the Petersburg-class Submarine.

This one is a successor to the Kilo-class, but its displacement is almost half that of the Varshavyanka. However, its array of armaments is unusually large. In addition to traditional mine and torpedo weapons (six 533-mm torpedo tubes, 18 torpedoes or mines), Project 667 is the world's first non-nuclear submarine to be equipped with specialized launchers for cruise missiles (ten vertical launchers in the middle part of the body). These cruise missiles can be both tactical and long-range missiles designed to destroy strategic targets deep into enemy territory.

Open-water trials of the diesel submarine St. Petersburg during project Lada

© Sputnik/ Alexei Danichev

Open-water trials of the diesel submarine "St. Petersburg" during project Lada

The Ladas are designed to defend coastlines against ships and other submarines, perform intelligence, provide surveillance and reconnaissance missions, and act as a mother ship for special forces.

The most important feature of the submarine is the new air-independent propulsion plant. With these power plants, a Lada submarine be submerged for up to 25 days, that is almost ten times longer than Project 636.3, and will be even less noisy.

The first submarine of this generation, the B-585 Sankt Peterburg, is now undergoing a trial operation, but subsequent vessels have been heavily re-designed.
The B-586 Kronstadt is set to join the Navy in 2017 and the B-587 Velikiye Luki – in 2018.

Borei-class ballistic-missile submarine (Type 955)

The Borei class is set to replace ageing Russian Delta III, Delta IV and Typhoon class ballistic missile submarines and will form the core of the Russian naval deterrent.

The Borei class submarine carries 16 Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missiles; each is a naval version of theTopol-M,(NATO Designation SS-N-30) and is equipped with 6-10 thermonuclear warheads, for a total of 96 to 196 warheads per submarine.


Strategic nuclear submarine Boreas

© JSC PO Sevmash

Strategic nuclear submarine Boreas

This ballistic missile has a range of 8,000 km and The National Interest is concerned that this means submarines in the Barents Sea and Sea of Okhotsk—where the Russian Fleet hides its ballistic missile submarines—could reach any point in the continental United States.

Three of the class, the Yury Dolgoruky (K-535), Alexandr Nevsky (K-550) and Vladimir Monomakh, are currently in service.

By 2020,the Russian Navy plans to operate a total of eight Borei class ballistic missile submarines.

The vessels are expected to serve with the Northern (Atlantic) Fleet and with the Pacific Fleet.

Ivan Gren Landing Ship (Project 11711)

This Russian vessel will have a very specific purpose: landing marines on hostile shores.

Each Gren will have a cargo capacity of 13 tanks or 36 armored personnel carriers, as well as up to 350 troops. The class will also feature a helicopter deck.

Two Ivan Gren landing ships will be able to land an entire naval motorized infantry battalion, or a battalion task force consisting of a naval motorized infantry company reinforced with self-propelled artillery and a company of tanks.


Landing craft Ivan Gren at Yantar Shipyard

© Sputnik/ Viktor Guseinov

Landing craft "Ivan Gren" at Yantar Shipyard

Armament for the Ivan Gren class is primarily defensive and consists of two WM-18 multiple rocket launchers for clearing beach obstacles, a 76-millimeter gun, and two AK-176M close-in weapon systems.

The delivery of the first in the class, the Ivan Gren, was delayed until 2015 while the second ship in the class, the Petr Morgunov began construction in October 2014.

Six Ivan Gren-class ships are planned, and are likely to be distributed evenly among the Northern/Baltic, Black Sea, and Pacific Fleets.

The cancellation of the purchase of French Mistral helicopter carriers, the magazine fears, is likely to prompt Russia to build more of the ships, which would not be subject to any foreign sanctions.

Finally, the publication lists Russia's New Aircraft Carrier.

Not much is yet known about the carrier, which is still under development. It is set to weigh 100,000 tons, as much as a modern US supercarrier, and carry up to 100 aircraft. The Krylov State Research Center has made a small model of the vessel, which features an angled flight deck, three aircraft elevators, a split, two structure bridge and ski jumps to assist takeoffs.


Russia's government-owned Krylov State Research Center is on its way towards developing Russia's latest aircraft carrier

© Krylov State Research Center

Russia's government-owned Krylov State Research Center is on its way towards developing Russia's latest aircraft carrier

The air wing for the carrier appears to consist of a navalized version of the new PAK-FA 5th generation stealth fighter with folding wings, MiG-35 multi-role naval fighters, Kamov helicopters and an airborne early warning aircraft similar to the E-2D Hawkeye. Given advances in unmanned aerial vehicles, it seems likely UAVs will form part of any future Russian air wing

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/world/20150509/1 ... z3ZngTn9KF

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0510000011

France may sell to China naval ships built for Russia

Staff Reporter 2015-05-10 09:22 (GMT+8)
The Dixmude arrives at Wusong naval port in Shanghai, May. 9. (Photo/Xinhua)

During the course of a visit by the French Navy to Shanghai between May 9-15, France may try to sell its Mistral-class amphibious assault ship to China, according to Duowei News, an overseas new outlet run by overseas Chinese.

The official microblog of the PLA Navy said that the French task force visiting China consists of two warships including the Dixmude, a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship, and Aconit, a La Fayette-class frigate. Dixmude is the third and last Mistral-class vessel designed for the French navy. It is the first time for a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship to visit a Chinese port.

Russia signed a contract with France to purchase two Mistral-class amphibious assault ships but the deal was scuttled due to sanctions imposed over the Ukraine crisis, even though construction of both vessels — named the Vladivostok and, fittingly if ironically, Sevastopol — had been completed.

The French Navy is unlikely to commission the two new ships and one option choice would be to try to sell them to other potential buyers including Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt or India. Even though China already has plans to develop its own amphibious assault ship, the country may still purchase the Vladivostok and Sevastopol as models to copy.

[Austin]

Russian destroyer design revealed

Russia developing Shtorm supercarrier

[Philip]

Tx Austin for the above links.The mainmast of the new Russian DDG looks similar to the mast on the Kol.,but with extra "wedding cake" tiers. There was another pic of the carrier model which showed a rear view and carrier AEW aircraft similar to USN Hawkeyes.The naval aircraft are also clearly naval variants of the PAK-FA/T-50 /FGFA.

Good report on the USN's 21st century naval strategy.

http://blogs.cfr.org/davidson/2015/05/1 ... ooks-like/

This Is What a Twenty-First Century U.S. Naval Strategy Looks Like

by Robert A. Newson
May 13, 2015

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) prepares for flight operations in the Arabian Gulf, Dec. 8, 2014. (Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Alex King/U.S. Navy/Flickr)

Naval strategy is in the news: Cooperative Strategy 21 (CS-21R) was released in April; the surface warfare community is discussing its supporting strategy, ‘Distributed Lethality;’ the Secretary of the Navy released his Navy’s Innovation Visionand the HASC Subcommittee on Seapower and Force Projection has been active with hearings and testimony from strategists.

It is clear the U.S. Navy has identified serious threats to its post-Cold War operating concepts and is altering its strategies and capabilities to adjust to adaptable future adversaries. This adjustment might be summarized in three imperatives: (1) spread out and increase the adversary’s risk, (2) embrace scalability, and (3) clarify difficult tradeoffs with strategic intent.

Spread Out and Increase the Adversary’s Risk. One of the key additions within CS-21R is the concern of anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) strategies, pursued by China, Iran, and North Korea, and others. In response, CS-21R adds an additional essential naval function, “all domain access.”

When the Cold War ended the U.S. military possessed undisputed dominance as the sole superpower. Without a peer competitor, the U.S. Navy increasingly concentrated its offensive strike capability in the aircraft carrier and built a battlegroup of destroyers, cruisers, and submarines into a ring of steel to defend the carrier. This concentration of naval power defied a century’s long trend of the ever-thinning battlefield. From the Napoleonic Wars through World War I, the battlefield was packed shoulder to shoulder; battles at sea were relatively compact as well. As weapons range, accuracy, and lethality continued to increase, the battlefield became more distributed with less platforms and people across a larger and larger area.

The current relatively tightly packed carrier battle group offers a single, paramount target—the aircraft carrier— to a massive barrage of large, accurate long-distance weapons. Conversely, distributed lethality responds to the A2/AD threat by spreading the U.S. navy’s offensive strike capability to a broad array of ships across a larger area of the ocean. The objective is to create a more lethal, mobile, and innovatively employed surface force that is less predictable and more disaggregated. This makes it more difficult for the enemy by increasing the enemy ISR challenge and dispersing enemy weapons focus—they have to look harder and longer and have to engage more targets.

On the innovation front, the U.S. Navy is successfully testing ship-to-ship missiles with dramatically increased range and is discussing how to put offensive capability on every class of ship, including amphibious and support ships. This would make it exponentially more difficult for the enemy to target the U.S. Navy’s offensive strike capability—if and when it is no longer primarily concentrated on the aircraft carrier. Attack submarines and yet-to-be developed autonomous undersea weapons systems also put the enemy at greater risk and disperse the navy’s offensive capability. When fielded, the laser weapons system and the electromagnetic rail gun will further increase the U.S. Navy’s weapons capability.

Embrace Scalability. Scalability includes the capacity to engage across the spectrum of conflict in an operationally appropriate and fiscally responsible manner. In the mid-1970s then-Chie fof Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Elmo Zumwalt pursued a high-low mix of capability. It was clear a fleet of only expensive, high-end ships would unreasonably limit the size of the fleet. Numbers matter, as evidenced by the U.S. Navy’s current dwindling fleet (down from nearly 600 ships to 289) and the growing challenge to be in the right place at the right time. However, a large, low-end navy would be unable to conduct high-end missions against peer competitors.

What is painfully apparent today is that high-end weapons and platforms are prohibitively costly when used for lower-end conflicts. The cost per smart bomb or missile, the hourly operating cost of advanced ships and planes, and the maintenance cost of these exquisite war machines have made fighting low-tech adversaries exceedingly costly.

As an example, the seven month bombing campaign supporting the intervention in Libya in 2011 cost an estimated $1 billion dollars. Eleven ships of the line, including two destroyers (DDG), two attack submarines (SSN), and one ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) bombarded advanced weapons on Libya’s limited military capability at great expense. There was not, and still is not, a viable low-end capability to provide an alternative. While it might be true that the F-35 can provide satisfactory air support to ground troops, it is also true that the A-10, Super Tucano, or the Scorpion and the smaller, cheaper weapons deployed from them can do the mission at a fraction of the total cost.

Current CNO Admiral Jon Greenert is pursuing a high-low mix of capability with the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP), the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV), the Afloat Staging Base (AFSB – USS Ponce), and the Littoral Combat Ship/Fast Frigate (LCS/FF). These lower-end platforms match the missions, size, and capabilities of our regional naval partners, central to Cooperative Strategy 21 (CS-21R). They can provide support to USMC and Special Operations Forces without dedicating limited amphibious assault ships, relieving high-end capital ships from being committed to smaller scale contingencies. This not only reduces the cost of small wars but also allows these expensive platforms to focus on near-peer competitors and regional deterrence. On the innovation front, these low-end platforms can act as mother ships to yet-to-be developed unattended surface and subsurface platforms that could significantly expand the distributed lethality concept.

An example of affordable scalability is the America class-Landing Helicopter Assault (LHA) seaframe when outfitted with the F-35 strike aircraft. While the newest LHA and the F-35 are not cheap, they will offer an impressive offensive strike capability at a significantly lower cost than supercarriers. The America-class “mini-carrier” is not a replacement for the supercarrier but, it would relieve a large carrier from lower-end contingencies and expand distributed lethality. (*IN amphibs could play the same role)

This high-low mix also contributes to tailored response to hybrid warfare, a combination of regular and irregular coercive tools used in an incremental approach to remain below a threshold of intervention from the U.S. or our allies. Russia is pursuing hybrid warfare in the Ukraine while China is applying hybrid warfare in the South China Sea. This incremental approach achieves two objectives: (1) it creates uncertainty so that responses are slow, delayed, and hesitant and (2) it puts the opponent of a hybrid warfare adversary in a difficult positon—those who seek to resist a gradualist approach can appear to establish unjustified red-lines and can be accused of over-reaction and dangerous escalation.

A high-low mix would allow the U.S. to respond across the spectrum of conflict while avoiding this perception of over-reaction or putting high-end platforms at risk to Russian or Chinese rapid escalation strategies designed to deter intervention, an integral part of their hybrid strategy. Just as in Admiral Zumwalt’s design, low-end platforms would engage in peacetime, low-end contingency, and ambiguous situations, while high-end platforms would be available to deter or fight and defeat a peer adversary.

On the innovation front, the modular, mission package concept developed for the Littoral Combat Ship can be applied across the spectrum of low-end platforms. There are sixty non-combatant support and logistics ships including Mobile Landing Platform (ML), Joint High-Speed Vessel (JHSV), Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB), and twenty-six Military Sealift Command preposition ships. The modular mission package concept can be expanded and adapted to a broader range of ships and missions, including Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HA/DR), medical assistance, ISR, electronic warfare, surface security (counter-piracy), mine warfare, and partner training and support.

An SA-330J Puma helicopter, left, assigned to the Military Sealift Command fleet replenishment oiler USNS Amelia Earhart (T-AKE 6) and an MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopter from the Red Lions of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 15 conduct a vertical replenishment with the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill (CG 52), Oct. 23, 2014. (Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class John Philip Wagner/U.S. Navy/Flickr)

Clarify Difficult Tradeoffs with Strategic Intent. Difficult and risk-laden trade-offs are required. Naval strategy—CS-21R, Distributed Lethality, Navy’s Innovation Vision, and a net assessment of threats and opportunities—should guide these decisions. Some tasks need more specialization and focus, administrative overhead needs to be prudently reduced, and some missions need to be curtailed or shared by others to focus on strategic payoffs. All of this entails risk; clarifying the risks and gains of these trade-offs is critical.

Without a major adversarial threat at sea, the post-Cold War navy has accumulated new and varied tasks, roles, and functions. These additions, while justified individually, have cumulatively reduced focus on core functions and diluted critical expertise. For example, the U.S. Navy conducts visit, board, search, and seizure (VBSS) operations with ships’ crew members. This is a necessary mission, but the assignment of this function should be reviewed.

The current method requires the ship’s crew to receive minimal but time-consuming training in small arms and small unit tactics to the detriment to their core responsibility (e.g. proficiently operating sonar equipment to find enemy submarines). Assigning this mission to an attached element from the Naval Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) or the U.S. Marine Corps would provide a much improved, professional, and tailored capability for VBSS while allowing ship’s crew to focus on the warfighting skills of their primary job.

As another example, the surface fleet has aggressively worked to reduce administrative overhead that has accumulated over decades. With each negative event within a staffing process, layers of oversight and additional checks and balances have been implemented. Again, individually this made sense, but cumulatively it added significant time and manpower to routine tasks, slowing productivity and consuming energy and opportunity costs. The surface fleet—implementing the CNO’s guidance to focus on warfighting— has eliminated or streamlined 149 processes or administrative requirements to provide increased time to training in warfighting skills.

Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) is another area where adjusting roles and functions would allow the U.S. Navy to focus more aggressively on all-domain access. In 2005, no Navy ships were assigned a BMD mission. Because of the noteworthy capabilities of the Aegis destroyers and cruisers, today, eighteen ships support BMD. Moving a significantly larger portion of this mission to shore based locations (Aegis Ashore) would dramatically reduce the cost of BMD; Aegis Ashore costs $750 million per capability while an Aegis Destroyer costs $1.6 to $1.9 billion. This would also allow destroyers and cruisers to focus on offensive all-domain access rather than geographically restrictive defensive missions. This contributes to distributed lethality and increases the conventional deterrence for those who are pursuing A2/AD strategies against the United States.

The U.S. Navy is on the right course, but many adjustments are required to deter and defeat adaptable future enemies, including non-state violent extremists, rouge nations, and peer-competitors. However, the U.S. Navy’s innovation efforts, its pursuit of a balanced high-low mix of capabilities, and its focus on warfighting are operationalizing the new strategy. The strategy is not fluff: actions and spending are linked to the words.

Captain Robert A. Newson is a Naval Special Warfare (SEAL) officer who spent twenty-two months in command of Special Operations Command (SOC)—Forward Yemen. He recently led strategy and concept development for the Naval Special Warfare Command. Previously, he served as director of the Joint Interagency Task Force—Counter Terrorism. Newson is a graduate of the University of Kansas and the Naval Postgraduate School (with distinction.) He is a PhD candidate at the University of San Diego. The conclusions and opinions expressed are his own and do not reflect the official position of the U.S. government.

Posted in Defense Strategy, Guest Post, U.S. Navy Share

[Paul]

7FBTK ‏@7FBTK
Vietnamese Kilo sub "Da Nang" departed Admiralty Shipyards 30 minutes ago for first day of factory sea trials

[Paul]

http://www.janes.com/defence/platforms/sea-platforms

Russia developing Shtorm supercarrier

Nikolai Novichkov, Moscow - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
14 May 2015

KRSC's design for a future Russian supercarrier. The model features a split air wing comprising navalised T-50 PAKFAs and MiG-29Ks, as well as jet-powered naval early warning aircraft and Ka-27 naval helicopters. Source: Nikolai Novichkov
Russia's Krylovsky State Research Center (KRSC) has developed a new multipurpose heavy aircraft carrier design called Project 23000E or Shtorm (Storm).

A scale model of the ship is going to be demonstrated for the first time at the International Maritime Defence Show 2015 in St Petersburg from 1-5 July, Valery Polyakov, the deputy director of KSC, told IHS Jane's .

"The Project 23000E multipurpose aircraft carrier is designed to conduct operations in remote and oceanic areas, engage land-based and sea-borne enemy targets, ensure the operational stability of naval forces, protect landing troops, and provide the anti-aircraft defence," Polyakov said.

The design has a displacement of 90-100,000 tons, is 330 m in length, 40 m wide, and has a draft of 11 m. It has a top speed of 30 kt, cruising speed of 20 kt, a 120-day endurance, a crew of 4-5,000, and designed to withstand sea state 6-7. Currently it has been designed with a conventional power plant, although this could be replaced by a nuclear one, according to potential customers' requirements.

The ship carries a powerful air group of 80-90 deck-based aircraft for various combat missions. The model features a split air wing comprising navalised T-50 PAKFAs and MiG-29Ks, as well as jet-powered naval early warning aircraft, and Ka-27 naval helicopters.

The carrier's flight deck is of a dual design, features an angled flight deck, and four launching positions: two via ski-jump ramps and two via electromagnetic catapults. One set of arrestor gear is included in the design. The design also features two islands; a feature only previously seen on the latest UK design.

Protection against air threats will be provided by four anti-aircraft missile system combat modules. An anti-torpedo armament suite is available.

The electronic support complex includes integrated sensors, including a multifunction phased array radar, electronic warfare system, and communications suite.

Polyakov pointed out that these specifications are subject to change, correction, and modification during the ship's design and development at every stage of work, once potential customers come up with a demand to change the weapons package and equipment.

[Singha]

>>two via ski-jump ramps and two via electromagnetic catapults.

that sounds very limiting . the heavy AEW/resupply types would need the catapult launch but more importantly, if you have a fighter armed and fueled for the catapults you would not be able to launch off the ski ramp with same (heaviest) fuel & payload.

even 3 cats , 1 waist and 2 front sound better than this. probably the Mig29K is not stressed for the catapult launch so they threw that in.
the charles de gaulle has just 2 catapults http://news.usni.org/wp-content/uploads ... arrier.jpg
yet our similar size ADS is hampered by the lack of ability to loft the E2 and in payload limitations of the 29k

[Will]

N now they will wait for a dumb customer to pour money to develop the same

[Singha]

its a nice honeypot to attract the sinic bee. bear in mind cheen would get a massive H&D kick from fielding a ship as large as the nimitz.

[NRao]

seems like there is a mild pattern here. Russians are in a reactive mode: IL-476, PAK-FA, T-14 and now this carrier.

My question still stands: whom do the Russians expect to use all these against (to justify this many resources)? Dunno. (Which is why I feel that they HAVE to sell them to other nationS. Diff story.)

However, what is new with this "carrier" is it seems to have an Expeditionary component. IF that is true, that they are planning on landing troops on some distant land, then neither the MiG-29 (certainly) nor the current PAK-FA (naval) will do.

[Aditya G]

A new class of destroyer for the Russian Navy is currently under development by the Krylov State Research Center (KSRC), IHS Jane's was told during a visit to the company.

The new design is called Project 23560E or Shkval (Squall), KSRC's deputy director, Valery Polyakov, who added that a scale model of the design is going to be exhibited for the first time during the International Maritime Defence Show 2015 in St Petersburg from 1-5 July.

"The Project 23560E destroyer is intended to conduct operations in off-shore maritime and oceanic zones, to destroy land and naval targets, to provide combat stability to naval forces, to maintain area anti-air and anti-missile defence, and to complete peacetime tasks in all zones of the world's oceans," said Polyakov.

The Project 23560E destroyer has full-load displacement of 15,000-18,000 tons, a length of 200 m, beam of 23 m, draft of 6.6 m, high speed of 32 kt, cruise speed of 20 kt, endurance of 90 days, and a crew of 250-300.

The destroyer is intended to be powered by a gas turbine engine (although Russia currently lacks any adequate sources for naval gas turbines). It is proposed to be fitted with a battle management system integrated with tactical and operational-tactical ACSs.

The destroyer's armament comprises 60-70 anti-ship or anti-land cruise missiles, 128 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), and 16-24 anti-submarine missiles. The ship is also equipped with a 130 mm multipurpose naval gun.

The destroyer's integrated electronic package includes a multi-functional phased array radar, electronic warfare subsystem, communications suite, underwater reconnaissance system. The aviation wing consists of two utility helicopters. These specifications could all be changed to suit customer requirements however, Polyakov stated.

[Singha]

hmm so ukraine will probably still honour the service contracts for the numerous zorya gas turbines russia uses but go slow on supplying OEM parts and reject any new projects.

this is a big problem for russia. no other sources exist that is !ukraine && !western

[Austin]

this is a big problem for russia. no other sources exist that is !ukraine && !western

Thats not completely true , Russia depends on Ukraine for the higher power engines for Destroyer like we use on P-15 class but since past few years Saturn is building engine to replace those and these ukraine crisis would further hasten in. They already have GT engine of 7000 & 14000 hp that powers their new corvette and frigate but are building a 27000 Class GT engine to replace those high power Ukr engine , so its in a way good rather then subsidising Ukr engine Mauf they can fund their own.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/740493

By 2017, the enterprise has undertaken to switch to a full production cycle for the manufacture of M90FR engines (27,000 horsepower) and create power units on their basis, the CEO said.

The Saturn enterprise is also preparing a basis for the trials of gas turbine engines for the Russian Navy. The enterprise has already developed M75RU (7,000 horsepower) and M70FRU (14,000 horsepower) engines, the company’s press office said.

M70FRU http://www.uecrus.com/eng/products/mari ... ne/m70fru/
M75RU http://www.uecrus.com/eng/products/marine_engine/m75ru/

[Lisa]

A UK boomer sailor writes about his experiences. Not quite sure how much to believe.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/265119365/The ... r-Th-re-At#

[Karan M]

A UK boomer sailor writes about his experiences. Not quite sure how much to believe.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/265119365/The ... r-Th-re-At#

Scary!

[Singha]

HMG has been forced to take cognizance and start a investigation
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 56148.html

wrt to base security seal guru richard marcinko was also involved in testing it for USN allegedly. pissed off some powerful folks who fixed him on some financial issues and sent him to 21 month in jail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Marcinko#Red_Cell
After relinquishing command of SEAL Team SIX, Marcinko was tasked by Vice Admiral James "Ace" Lyons, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, with the design of a unit to test the Navy's vulnerability to terrorism. This unit was the Naval Security Coordination Team OP-06D, unofficially named Red Cell.[6] In 1984, Marcinko hand-picked twelve men from SEAL Team Six and one from Marine Force Recon.

This team tested the security of naval bases, nuclear submarines, ships, civilian airports, and an American embassy. Under Marcinko's leadership, the team was able to infiltrate seemingly impenetrable, highly secured bases, nuclear submarines, ships, and other purported "secure areas" such as Air Force One, and disappear without incident. These demonstrations showed that a vulnerable military resulted from the replacement of Marine and Naval Military Police by contracted private security agencies often staffed by retired military personnel.

Marcinko has claimed, among other things, that Red Cell successfully captured nuclear devices from United States Navy facilities, and proved the viability of plans to:

penetrate and attack nuclear-powered submarines
destroy subs by using them as dirty bombs
capture launch codes for nuclear weapons aboard the subs by using mild torture techniques on personnel in charge of launch codes.

Former members of Red Cell, notably Steve Hartmann and Dennis Chalker, maintain that these exercises were a cover to move SPECWAR operators around the world for covert missions against real-world terrorists.[7]

[Karan M]

LOL this comment takes the cake

"...the MoD said it contained “a number of subjective and unsubstantiated personal views, made by a very junior sailor, with which the Naval Service completely disagrees”...."

It's an expected reaction and a dead give away from the MOD. Before they have made any investigation into they claims they have dismissed them out of hand and carried out a character assassination on the sailor. Are they stupid or what?

Why would a very junior sailor be incapable of making legitimate safety concerns without his reputation being immediately rubbished by his superiors.

Their response suggests that they know about the safety problems already and are hiding them from public scrutiny.

This guy needs to make a dash for the Ecuadorian embassy.

I just hope that there will be many MPs in parliament who support this guy and baulk at the MOD's response.

[Philip]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scott ... er-5711371
Whistleblower warns Trident submarines are a 'disaster waiting to happen' due to safety blunders and security lapses

17 May 2015
By Heather Greenaway

WILLIAM McNeilly is on the run from the military police and has produced an report called the Nuclear Secrets claiming to lift the lid on the alarming state of the UK’s ageing and short-staffed nuclear deterrent.

The Royal Navy's Trident-class nuclear submarine Vanguard
A NUCLEAR weapons engineer has warned Trident submarines are “a disaster waiting to happen.”

William McNeilly claims serious safety blunders and multiple security lapses at Faslane are putting the UK in danger.

The whistleblower, who is now on the run from the military police, says he was on patrol with HMS Victorious from January to April this year.

He alleges the Trident missiles the submarine carries are vulnerable to a terrorist attack that “would kill our people and destroy our land.”

Debate over Trident: Should it stay or should it go? Voters have their say

McNeilly told the Sunday Herald he believes infiltrators have “the perfect opportunity to send nuclear warheads crashing down on the UK.

In his detailed 18-page report called the Nuclear Secrets he claims to lift the lid on the alarming state of the UK’s ageing and short-staffed nuclear deterrent.

McNeilly alleges 30 safety and security flaws on Trident submarines, based at Faslane, including failures in testing whether missiles could be safely launched, burning toilet rolls starting a fire in a missile compartment, and security passes and bags going unchecked.

He also reports alarms being muted because they went off so often, missile safety procedures being ignored and top secret information left unguarded.

McNeilly, who went absent without leave from the Royal Navy last week and expects to be arrested, said: “My information comes from good sources and I have no reason to lie. If change isn’t made, a nuclear catastrophe almost certainly will happen.”

The Royal Navy has launched an investigation into McNeilly’s report, and is working with civilian police to find him. It describes his criticisms as “subjective and unsubstantiated,” stressing that submarines never go to sea unless they are completely safe.

[brar_w]

[PratikDas]

ABC News: Australia launches HMAS Hobart - Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD)
23 May 2015

The audit into the status of the project has revealed at least an additional $1.2 billion will be required to complete it.

We shouldn't be too hard on ourselves for delays or cost overruns.

Code: Select all

AWD schedule delays

		Original delivery	Revised estimate
Ship 1	December 2014		June 2017
Ship 2	March 2016			September 2018
Ship 3	June 2017 			March 2020

[Philip]

http://tuoitrenews.vn/politics/28254/vi ... -govt-site
Vietnam to receive two more Gepard-class warships soon: gov’t site
tuoi tre news
05/25/2015

The Vietnam People's Navy will soon get their hands on two new Gepard-class 3.9 frigates, the third and fourth of their kind which Russia has built for the Southeast Asian country, as the shipbuilder has just completed them, government website chinhphu.vn reported, quoting Russian media.

Russia has finished the construction of the two frigates for the Vietnamese navy, Russian news website Sputnik quoted Rafi Fatychow, spokesman for the Zelenodolsk shipyard, as saying last week.

Weapons will be installed on the two warships soon, Fatychow said at a forum on the maritime industry held in Moscow from May 19 to 21.

Gepard-class 3.9 frigates are an export version of the guard vessels under project 11661 of Russia, which are built in the Zelenodolsk shipyard in the Russian republic of Tatarstan.

The two warships will be delivered to Vietnam as soon as the weapons are installed, Sputnik quoted Fatykhow as saying.

In terms of features, the two new ships are similar to the first two Gepard-class 3.9 vessels under the Vietnam People's Navy.

The difference is that the second pair will be equipped with anti-submarine weapons, torpedo tubes, and other modern devices used for detecting enemy submarines. The ships also use modern generators with improved features.

Thus, the two new warships can effectively fight targets in the air, sea, and underwater, chinhphu.vn said.

Vietnam’s first two Gepard-class 3.9 frigates, the missile escort vessels Dinh Tien Hoang (HQ-011) and Ly Thai To (HQ-012), built by the Rosoboronexport Company at the Zelenodolsk shipyard, were dispatched to Brigade No.162 under Naval Region 4 under the Vietnam People's Navy four years ago.

Naval Region 4 is an independent naval command managing and protecting Vietnam’s Truong Sa (Spratly) archipelago, Phu Quy Island, the East Vietnam Sea and the south-central coast, from Phu Yen to the north of Binh Thuan, including the coastal provinces of Phu Yen, Khanh Hoa, and Ninh Thuan.

The multipurpose frigates, designed to track and destroy floating targets and to perform other specialized tasks including air defense, anti-submarine, escort and patrol, can enter combat independently or in squadrons.

The two warships, worth US$350 million each, were built following a contract signed by Vietnam and Russia on May 12, 2006, and are also equipped with stealth technology to minimize their presence on enemy radar screens.

Following the request of the Vietnam People's Navy, the two vessels under Project 11661 were completely redesigned to include stealth technology and the most advanced weapons available from Russia.

The new technologies and weapons include two 30mm AO-18KD / 6K30GSh cannons, Kh-35 UranE anti-ship missiles with a range of 130 kilometers, and eight Sosna-R. Palma laser-guided surface-to-air missile launchers with the ability to disable air targets at a distance of up to 8,000 meters and height of up to 3,500 meters.

The ships can also accommodate the multi-role Ka-27 Helix naval helicopter, which can perform anti-ship and submarine hunting tasks.

[Philip]

Defence hoses down PM’s Soryu sub hype
Tom Richardson | 25 May 2015
http://indaily.com.au/news/2015/05/25/d ... -sub-hype/

Adelaide | The federal Defence Department has refused to back Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s assertion that the Japanese Soryu submarine is “the best in the world”.

The PM made the claim in February, telling parliament that discussions over the multi-billion dollar Future Submarines contract “have been more detailed with the Japanese, because the Japanese make the best large conventional submarine in the world”.

But written answers from Defence to questions put on notice by Senator Nick Xenophon from an Estimates hearing are considerably less effusive.

Asked whether authorities have briefed the Prime Minister that the Soryu is the best in its class, the department replies: “Defence has provided a range of advice to Government on the future submarine program, and through engagement with Japan, Defence has established that Japan has been successful in the design and build of the Soryu class, which is of a size similar to that required by Australia.”

Xenophon told InDaily: “The political rhetoric doesn’t match the technical realities.”

In similarly measured terms, Defence responds to a question about whether it has technical information to support the PM’s claim: “Defence has technical information that helps us to understand aspects of the Soryu design that relate to our submarine capability needs.”

However, it continues, “publicly available information does not provide a true indication of the capabilities of the Soryu design”.

“Submarine capability is judged against a number of attributes, including range, endurance, payload, stealth and sensor performance. The Soryu and Collins class differ in various ways when each of these attributes is considered. There are particular requirements for the Future Submarine that the Soryu class has not been designed to meet. Incorporation of the preferred combat and weapon systems for the Future Submarine would also entail design changes.”

Defence revealed senior navy submarine command-qualified officers have “been to sea in a Soryu class submarine” early this year as part of their research.

“My mail in terms of people that I’ve spoken to, the inside running is with the Japanese,” Xenophon said.

“They’re the favourites to win this, the process seems to be stacked towards them and that is a real concern because they have never built a sub overseas let alone shared their technology, unlike the French or the Germans,” he told ABC Radio.

He also highlighted fears an overseas design would not yield local jobs in manufacturing, highlighting another response to a Question on Notice, with Defence Minister Kevin Andrews confirming the much-hyped 500 new jobs would instead be in “design assurance, combat system integration, and land-based testing of submarine systems”.

HMAS Hobart after its launch in Adelaide on Saturday. Supplied image

It comes as the Liberal Party’s embattled member for the Federal seat of Hindmarsh claims he’s lobbying his colleagues “extremely hard” to push the case for South Australian shipbuilding.

The Abbott Government lobbed an eleventh hour grenade into celebrations for the weekend launch of the first Air Warfare Destroyer, selectively leaking details of an internal audit that cast the AWD’s management in further bad light.

It was seen as a concerted bid to undermine ASC’s case for a significant slice of the Future Submarines project. But the move could have local political ramifications, with defence jobs a sensitive issue with South Australian voters and the prospect of several Liberal seats changing hands.

Hindmarsh, already on a knife-edge, appears the most likely to fall, but incumbent first-term MP Matt Williams said: “We’ll see about that next year.”

“People know in my electorate that I’m working very hard, talking to every minister,” he told ABC Radio.

“I spoke to (Finance Minister) Matthias Cormann last Wednesday, each opportunity I have I’ve brought a Cabinet Minister down to ASC and I’ve had numerous meetings with the Adelaide and the South Australian business community where they’re talking about defence shipbuilding and arguing the case

PS:The ultra-effusive manner in which the Oz govt.,PM Abbot is touting the Japanese Soryu sub as the "best in the world",without even testing it against the competition from France,Germany and Sweden,leads one to believe that there is something "maritime" (aka "fishy") about this deal of the Soryu species of Japanese fish! Anyone who knows how Japan operates-the invisible men who run the show and who pull the strings of every deal,fix PMs, with alleged dubious links to vested interests,will immediately see in this attempt to shoehorn the Soryu into the Oz navy a deal that has already been made and the handshake completed.What is now being witnessed is the charade of a competition that has become necessary because of the outpour of consternation about the entire acquisition. Who are also part of the process are the Yanquis,who want to see an Oz-Nippon military alliance more firmly cemented.What better way than to buy Japanese subs which will make Oz entirely dependent upon them.

The same way perhaps in which we are also being urged to buy the US-2 amphib,very costly,cheaper alternatives available,with no anti-sub capability or weaponry supplied,which the GOI/MOD has itself flagged for a more thorough examination as to its suitability in current acquisition form.

No construction jobs in South Australia from submarine contract
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/no-con ... 524-gh8buu

[brar_w]

The 711 for robot subs underwater plug and stay hubs

http://breakingdefense.com/2015/05/the- ... stay-hubs/

[Singha]

well actually Soryu is the only operating submarine of that size in the world. more are being built as Soryu2 with new Li-ion batteries instead of the kockums aip engine in Soryu1.
france/italy has no proposal to match.
the U216 is a set of ppt slides. no prototype exists.

so given you need to urgently retire the collins and minimize chances of a big screwup, where would you go?

Aus already has rich experience in building and operating a type which the host nation did not operate
they had to call in US help to fix the collins since the OEM gave up at some point
same will be case with a U216 buy.....with Soryu japan has a stake for decades in updating and fixing any problems.

[brar_w]

They should just make the necessary changes in policy and piggy back on the next big block IV Virginia buy. There are plans to explore 3 Virginia's a year production and that would be much easier to do if there is an export customer. The large scale of production has brought down the cost considerably and the last contract went at around $18 Billion for 10 B IV's.

[Singha]

Soryu might still be cheaper than virginia by 50%. virginia is way overkill for what Aus intends to do with these boats

[brar_w]

The Virginia is cheaper compared to what they spent on their current subs ..Overkill yes, but expensive only if they plan on producing them locally.

[Aditya G]

Code: Select all

AWD schedule delays

		Original delivery	Revised estimate
Ship 1	December 2014		June 2017
Ship 2	March 2016			September 2018
Ship 3	June 2017 			March 2020

This is how she looks when "launched"



This is the state when we launch ours:



Vikrant was first "floated out", then "launched" and now being readied for "relaunch". And still the superstructure will not be complete.

[Singha]

yes our launches are a real sham. no meat on the bone. the Aus pic is what is seen worldwide on launch.

[member_22539]

^^Maybe to make better use of limited infrastructure?

[NRao]

yes our launches are a real sham. no meat on the bone. the Aus pic is what is seen worldwide on launch.

When the construction processes/whatever are improved, then we should see improvements.

[NRao]

As a FYI:

Navy Chief Praises San Diego’s Futuristic USS Independence

The chief of naval operations praised the versatility of the San Diego-based USS Independence and other futuristic littoral combat ships of its type.

Adm. Jonathan Greenert spoke last week in Pensacola, FL, where the Independence is testing new anti-mine warfare technology in the Gulf of Mexico. The trimaran-hull craft is the first of its type.

“The thing that is of value about the LCS is that she has great volume, high speed, and is modular,” said Greenert. “What that means is you can change out packages to perform different missions.

“Currently the Independence is configured for mine countermeasures operations, but she can be reconfigured for other missions including maritime security or anti-submarine warfare. These packages could be forward deployed around the world in hot spots, where in a matter of a few days, the ship could be changed as necessary to meet the demand.”

The Navy is building 52 of the ships in two variants, the Independence type and the single-hull Freedom type. The first ship of each type is based in San Diego.

[Surya]

yea and there are no shady background operators in France or Germany

and yea the SWedes were squeaky clean

barely veiled racism at play

“They’re the favourites to win this, the process seems to be stacked towards them and that is a real concern because they have never built a sub overseas let alone shared their technology, unlike the French or the Germans,” he told ABC Radio.