International Naval News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/03/27/secr ... 14989.html
The Secret Norwegian Submarine Base Being Rented by the Russians

By Elisabeth Braw / March 19, 2015
Norway is ruing the day it sold off a key submarine base near the Russian border and now, with President Putin flexing his muscles in the region, there is growing alarm among Nato chiefs that the west has left itself woefully unprotected.

Only six years ago, Norwegian politicians decided that Russia no longer posed a significant threat and that it was time to sell its top secret base called Olavsvern, which was hewn into a mountain and equipped with the most sophisticated electronics available. It’s located near the small town of Ramfjord near Norway’s border with Russia.

“Our military and civilian readiness has been badly weakened,” says Anne-Margrete Bollmann, a former career military officer and now president of the Norwegian Defence Association. “Facilities have been closed, reserve capabilities have been reduced, readiness plans have been forgotten. Olavsvern is a prime example of a facility that has been lost, and in hindsight it’s clear that selling it was not a good decision.”

Bollman believes that the increasing strategic importance of Norway and thus Nato’s North requires a permanent military presence in the region.

She is not alone. “[The Ukraine crisis] demands of us that we be more watchful of the activities that are taking place in our core areas,” Norway’s defence minister Ine Eriksen Soreide said recently said in a newspaper interview. “We need a Nato that has a good understanding of its regional areas.”

On 16 March, Putin raised Russia’s Northern Fleet to full combat readiness in exercises in Russia’s Arctic North, a move clearly intended as a response to Norway’s recently-­completed Joint Viking exercise in the High North, its largest military exercise in a generation.

Russian defence minister Sergei Shoygu said the order came from Putin himself, who has promised to spend more than 21 trillion rubles ($340bn) by the end of the decade to overhaul Russia’s fighting forces.

The sale of Olavsvern was long in the making. Eventually, the government put it up for sale on finn.no, a Norwegian equivalent of eBay. Even then, this “unique property” – as the sales pitch put it – with a total area of 948,900 square metres, failed to catch the 105 million kroner (€12.1m) price the government had hoped for. In the end, it was sold to a businessman named Gunnar Wilhelmsen for 38.1 million kroner (€4.4m).

Compounding military officials’ anxiety, Wilhelmsen now rents the base out to a fleet of Russian research vessels. Wilhelmsen didn’t respond to an interview request, but on his website, he extols Olavsvern’s virtues, advertising a 25,000 square-metre mountain plant featuring a 3,000 square-metre deep-water quay (and 124 bedrooms).
Olavsvern
An image of the inside of the base from Olavsvern's website. olavsvern.no

One of the recently arrived ships at Olavsvern is the Akademik Nemchinov, which belongs to Sevmorneftegeofizika, a Russian geophysics company that specialises in seismic measuring in deep and shallow waters. Seismic surveys are a bona fide area of international research, so seismic research vessels docking in another country is not unusual. But Sevmorneftegeofizika is not just any seismic research firm: it counts among its clients both Gazprom and a host of other firms fully or partly owned by the Kremlin. “Russian research vessels are part of the Russian government’s sea power,” explains Göran Frisk, a retired top Swedish naval commander. “The Russian marine’s most important task is making sure that the country’s nuclear submarines can move freely in the world’s oceans. The Russian research vessels are no joking matter. It’s incomprehensible that the Norwegian government could make such a gaffe.”

According to Frisk, Russian research vessels off the Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian coasts also undock mini-submarines for surveillance and warfare preparations, and investigate the seabed and hydrographic conditions. Indeed, during last year’s submarine hunt in the Stockholm archipelago, the Russian research vessel Professor Logachev mysteriously appeared, quickly departing with, what eyewitnesses reported as, an object being towed. The suspected submarine was never found. Curiously, the prime minister who saw the sale through, Jens Stoltenberg, is now Nato’s secretary-general.

According to Øyvind Korsberg, an MP for the Tromsø region, where Olavsvern is situated, the naval base was crucial for the protection of Norway’s sovereignty. “Olavsvern was of strategic importance to a robust, Norwegian and Nato defence in the north,” he argues. “It’s unfortunate that while our big neighbour is growing their military capacity in the north, we’re doing the opposite.”

Yet locals aren’t overly concerned. “We hope that the new owner will bring as many vessels as possible to Olavsvern, which will benefit the local economy,” reports mayor Jens Johan Hjort of the Tromsø municipality, which includes Ramfjord. Hjort acknowledges that it might seem like a paradox given that Olavsvern was a top-secret facility until only a few years ago, “but it’s good that the facility can be monetised”.

And in everyday life in the Tromsø area, Russian-Norwegian relations are quite harmonious, with Russians constituting the area’s largest non-Norwegian community. Nils Kristian Sørheim Nilsen, managing director of the Regional Business Association of Tromsø, shares Hjorts optimism.

“I can’t see any larger problems with these kinds of customers [such as Russian vessels], other than taking normal precautions,” he says. “Due to increased oil and gas activities in the region, also involving Russia, these kinds of visits by our neighbour are natural.”

The parties currently forming Norway’s coalition government opposed the sale of Olavsvern, and defence minister Ine Eriksen Søreide frequently warns of Russian activities in Norway’s High North. But even if the government were to conclude it wanted Olavsvern back, it’s Wilhelmsen who decides. And there’s no indication that he’s prepared to sell.
PS:I'm sure that many Russians must be still ruing the day that the Czar sold off Alaska to the US!
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

How a little Turkish minesweeper humbled the mighty British and French warships,which resulted in the Gallipolli landings.

Navy disaster led to Gallipoli landing
http://www.news.com.au/national/breakin ... 7273379866
BENEATH the busy waters of the Dardanelles lies the French battleship Bouvet, its upturned hulk the ghostly resting place for more than 600 French sailors.

THEIR demise on March 18, 1915 along with two British battleships led to a momentous decision four days later - a century ago on Sunday - to land troops, including Australians and New Zealanders, on Gallipoli.
Previously Britain thought it could win this campaign with naval power alone.
But loss of more than a third of the force on March 18, 1915 prompted a rethink.
Bouvet's destruction was sudden - cruising at speed, the 12,000-tonne vessel struck a Turkish mine and was also hit by a large shell.
Within two minutes - some say under a minute - she capsized and sank with just 50 survivors of her crew of 710.
An hour later HMS Irresistible struck a mine and sank with loss of 150 crewmen. Three hours later HMS Ocean hit yet another mine and sank, fortunately with little loss of life.
Compounding this disaster, three other battleships were damaged by Turkish shells and mines.
Historian Peter Stanley said the decision to proceed with an amphibious landing came about because this naval attack had gone so wrong.
"The final decision was made on the 22nd but the planning began in February when (British commander General Ian) Hamilton was appointed and when the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force started assembling on Lemnos. The first Australians arrived on Lemnos in the first week of March," he told AAP.
"It wasn't an impulsive decision. It was the next best option."
This entire campaign had its genesis in a plea for help from Russia, hard-pressed by Turkish forces in the Caucasus. On January 2 it asked Britain for some assistance.
With some reluctance, Turkey had announced allegiance to Germany on October 31, then invading the Russian Caucasus to recover lost territory.
Britain assured Russia help would be forthcoming.
With ever growing enthusiasm, First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill seized on the proposal for forcing the Dardanelles using the might of the Royal Navy.
Once known as the Hellespont, this 61-kilometre strait links the Aegean to the Sea of Marmara.
Churchill believed the under-used navy could battle past Turkish guns and minefields and arrive off the Turkish capital Constantinople. With some judicious shelling of the Sultan's palace, there would be a revolution and installation of a more amenable government which would withdraw Turkey from the war.
Knowing what we know now, this seems fanciful.
But as the western front turned into stalemate, both sides perceived opportunities of unparalleled allure. Should the allies succeed, the ring of steel around Germany would be tightened and supply lines to Russia secured.
For most of a page of the official history, Charles Bean waxes lyrical about the potential benefits of success, which he concluded could have shortened the war by a year if not two.
"A hundred years ago, many saw the Dardanelles as the sector where the war would be decided," Oxford Professor Hew Strachan told the Gallipoli conference in Canberra .
The naval campaign opened on February 19 with battleships seeking to obliterate Turkish forts guarding the Dardanelles entrance.
This was deceptively successful but difficulties mounted. For the fleet to proceed, minefields needed to be cleared but slow vulnerable minesweepers couldn't operate until Turkish guns were silenced.
Turkey speedily appreciated what was afoot and reinforced already formidable defences. Turkish defenders proved resilient - without a direct hit, guns kept firing.
Britain's naval commander realised the only way to silence Turkish guns was through landing demolition parties of Royal Marines - effective until Turkey increased infantry defences. There lay a dawning of realisation that only through a ground force could this ever succeed.
But there was to be one final shot at success by naval means alone on March 18.
This turned into a catastrophe, thanks to Turkish minelayer Nusret which secretly laid a line of some two dozen mines in a previously unmined bay - Turks had noticed attacking warships turned through this area when withdrawing. Bouvet was the first to die and others followed.
Turkey justly recognises March 18 as a major victory, to which this plucky little vessel made a stunning contribution. Nusret remains in the Turkish navy as a museum ship.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5722
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Kartik »

Chinese Type 093T SSN design breaks cover

Image
A computer-generated image of a Chinese nuclear-powered submarine (SSN) has recently appeared on both news and social media websites. It illustrates a variant of the Type 093/Shang-class SSN carrying a docking hangar for a special forces swimmer delivery vehicle (SDV).
..
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

^^ Good Improvisation for special Ops but the chinese SSN are not highly rated by US ONI

http://lewis.armscontrolwonk.com/archiv ... new-boomer
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Exciting development.The IN too could employ dozens of UUVs of various types sanitizing the chokepoints giving ingress and egress in the IOR region at a fraction of the cost of acquiring large numbers of subs. These UUVs could be examined as a cost-effective alternative to placing massive networks of sensors on the sea floor,which could be tapped as the US did with Russian undersea cables in the "Ivy bells" op.

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... st/108352/
The Military’s Robotic Ghost Ship Passes Critical Test
March 24, 2015 By Patrick Tucker

An autonomous sub-hunting ship passed an important technological milestone and the oceans may never be the same.


How do you keep track of increasingly stealthy Russian, Chinese and Iranian submarines? If you’re the U.S. military, you build a robotic ghost ship to follow them around the high seas.

Patrick Tucker is technology editor for Defense One. He’s also the author of The Naked Future: What Happens in a World That Anticipates Your Every Move? (Current, 2014). Previously, Tucker was deputy editor for The Futurist, where he served for nine years. Tucker's writing on emerging technology ... Full Bio

In 2010, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, announced that they were building a 132-foot autonomous boat to track quiet, diesel-powered submarines. The program was dubbed Anti-submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel, or ACTUV.

To little notice, the system earlier this year passed a critical test, moving much closer to actual deployment and potentially changing not just naval warfare but also the way humans, ships, and robotic systems interact across the world’s waters.

In six weeks of tests along a 35-nautical mile stretch of water off of Mississippi, testers at engineering company Leidos and DARPA put the ACTUV’s systems through 100 different scenarios. The test boat, equipped with nothing more than off-the-shelf radar components, a digital area chart and some proprietary software, was able to complete an autonomous trip without crashing into rocks, shoals, or erratically behaving surface vessels. In future tests, the ship will tail a target boat at 1 kilometer’s distance.

Most importantly, the tests showed that the robot boat could execute a difficult military mission without violating the maritime laws outlined in the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. They also provided a critical proof-of-concept for machine-learning systems at sea, showing that big robots can, indeed, navigate the open seas along with cruise ships and shrimp boats. The next big challenge for the ACTUV will be the same kind of tests, but with “enemy ships” trying to block or interfere with it.

The world’s waters could soon be crowded with robot ships that almost never hit land.

Speaking at a National Defense Association Event in Virginia, DARPA program manager Ellison Urban outlined why the Navy needs sub-hunting boat bots. Diesel-electric submarines, with their nearly-noiseless engines, are incredibly difficult to track from afar. They’re also cheap at $200 million to $300 million apiece, making them affordable to the likes of Iran, which claims to have a fleet of 17. “Instead of chasing down these submarines and trying to keep track of them with expensive nuclear powered-submarines, which is the way we do it now, we want to try and build this at significantly reduced cost. It will be able to transit by itself across thousands of kilometers of ocean and it can deploy for months at a time. It can go out, find a diesel-electric submarine and just ping on it,” said Urban.

Leidos conducted the tests on a 42-foot surrogate boat while they finish construction of the ACTUV prototype vessel, the Sea Hunter, which is expected to launch this fall.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... al-warfare
Rise of the robots: the revolution in naval warfare
Underwater 'satellites' and drones launched from the seabed are among US military project
Technologies are being developed to enable increasing automation in surface vessels. Photo: SCMP

The robotic revolution that transformed warfare in the skies will soon extend to the deep sea, with underwater spy "satellites", drone-launching pods on the ocean floor and unmanned ships hunting submarines.

Officials at the US military's research agency outlined new programmes this week that included a number of potentially groundbreaking technologies that could alter the way naval battles are fought, in the same way that robotic aircraft have altered warfare on land and in the air.

One proposed system involves robot pods on the ocean floor that could launch surveillance drones in the air or at sea or provide a communications link when American forces were facing electronic jamming, said Jared Adams, spokesman for Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa).

"The motivation is to enable timely deployment of unmanned distributed systems to distant locations by pre-deploying the assets years in advance and then triggering their release for rapid effects at future times of our choosing," Adams said.

The programme has been dubbed "Upward Falling Payloads", or UFP. And officials said the robot pods floating to the water's surface to release various payloads could perform some roles now carried out by submarines, which are much more expensive to operate.

With America's technological edge shrinking, researchers are looking at how to create and build weapons quickly, instead of the drawn-out process that usually prevails at the Pentagon.

Darpa Deputy Director Steven Walker said the agency was "rethinking how we develop new military systems" to be more agile and "cost-effective".

"Some of our systems today are extremely capable, the most capable in the world, but they are very complex, they are costly and take a long time to develop," he said.

The UFP programme of undersea pods poses serious technological challenges, including how to trigger the launchers, how to make them rise to the surface and how to secure a power supply deep under the ocean for more than a year at a time.

Darpa, known for breakthrough experiments over the years that helped create the internet, stealth aircraft, drones, "smart" bombs and micro-technologies, is also keen on some other maritime research.

One programme envisages spying "eyes" on the ocean floor, including mobile and fixed systems, that would act as satellites or "sub-ulites," enabling the US to spot foreign submarines.

Researchers with the Distributed Agile Submarine Hunting (Dash) expect the "sub-ulites" to have "a detection envelope that's pretty broad", Walker said.

Darpa's scientists are also working on passive sonars deep under the sea that would listen out for the "acoustic signatures" of submarines.

Another programme at Darpa is moving closer to reality, potentially revolutionising submarine warfare.

The project would deploy unmanned vessels on the ocean's surface to track enemy submarines, a "ghost ship" that could free up naval warships for other tasks.

Sub-hunting is a notoriously time-consuming and expensive task, particularly when it involves diesel submarines that have extremely quiet engines.

If the project succeeded, it could prove a "game-changer" for the navy, officials said.
This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Rise of machines will revolutionise naval warfare
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.marinelink.com/news/submarin ... 88450.aspx
Vietnam's Submarines to Counter China?
By Aiswarya Lakshmi

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Vietnam's new submarines could alter the balance in the South China Sea quite dramatically, say maritime security analysts.

Vietnam and China have long contested claims over the Spratly and Paracel islands, including last year's dispute over China's attempted oil drilling and clashes between Vietnamese fishermen and Chinese boats.
As Beijing presses territorial claims in the South China Sea, Vietnam is arming itself for a potential air and sea confrontation with its larger neighbor.

Despite the difference in size between the two nations, particularly in terms of military power, Vietnam is not backing down.
A "confrontation in the South China Sea could be more devastating than any wars, any confrontations that you have seen in the region," said Hoang Anh Tuan, director of the Vietnamese Institute for Foreign Affairs and Strategic Studies.

China's claim to more than 80 percent of the South China Sea threatens 70 percent of Vietnam's exclusive economic zone, Tuan said.
Vietnam's recent acquisition of three new 636MV attack submarines has cast the spotlight on the burgeoning regional submarine race in the South China Sea.

Experts hold that once Vietnam’s submarine force is fully capable of combat, it is very likely to carry out the so-called regional denial activities along its coastline and its military base in the South China Sea.

As the Kilo-class submarines imported from Russia are successively commissioned, Vietnam will soon pose an effective maritime deterrent to China on the South China Sea. This will force China to think twice when it challenges this much smaller neighbor on issues concerning the disputed waters.

Vietnam’s confrontation with China has attracted patrons. The United States, India, and Japan, seeking to rein China in, have made overtures to Vietnam. The United States is looking to sell maritime patrol planes to Vietnam, while Japan is providing ships. India is training submariners for Vietnam’s fleet of brand-new submarines.
PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by PratikDas »

PratikDas wrote:
brar_w wrote:Having said that most would not hold the NY Times, Wall street Journal in the same league as RT or Foxnews. But that is a matter of opinion I guess.
From an Indian perspective, they're no better, but I don't expect you to understand that or even want to.
And now from R. Jagannathan, Editor at Firstpost & Firstbiz. Writer with interests in history, politics, philosophy, business, social trends, human behaviour.
@TheJaggi: There was a time when we used to treat NYT, Wapo, Economist as next to god's truth. Now I know. They are essentially sophisticated racists
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Singha »

Russian Nuclear Submarine Catches Fire at Severodvinsk Shipyard
MOSCOW — A nuclear submarine caught fire in a shipyard in Russia on Tuesday, officials told NBC News.

The Oscar II-class submarine, named the Orel, caught fire during welding work in the shipyard in the city of Severodvinsk, Russia's state-run United Shipbuilding Corporation confirmed.

USC, which owns the Zvyozdochka shipyard in the northern province of Arkhangelsk, told NBC News that no one was injured and that the vessel's nuclear reactor had been shut down beforehand.

"Everyone was promptly evacuated," USC spokesman Ilya Zhitomirsky said, adding that most of the fire had been extinguished by 4:30 p.m. local time (9:30 a.m. ET). "Basically, it's just rubber burning."

At its peak the fire measured more than 20 square yards, Zhitomirsky confirmed. The fire involved rubber insulation between the submarine's light and pressure hull.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Image

Image

Image
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

IRIN Admiral Naghdi, over 50 years old corvette and still going

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Singha »

looking at this weak scrawny vessel, iran definitely needs to up its game in ships.
perhaps they can buy some and build some of our Saryu and kamorta class vessels.
we can even kit them up with the Oto 76mm gun, Ak630 , torpedoes, radars, EW and brahmos if they want inclined tubes.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

Those ships are fine for brown water duties and for straits of Hormuz .It goes on to prove the Hull Life can be Sea Worthy after more than 50 years , its the electronics/weapons upgrade that would cost.

Saryu should be good for them although Brahmos is a strict no no as Israel would freak out shouting murder.
member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by member_23370 »

Land based Brahmos is a very good option for IRIN. Would make any soothie or their ally ship in the persian gulf very nervous.
member_28840
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by member_28840 »

The crowd of Orange life vest clad figures dotting the superstructure, says much about the seakeeping ability of these ships.

@Austin, Israel shouldn't have a problem since the Barak-8 was specifically designed to intercept supersonic anti ship missiles. But selling anything to the Iranians is a pipedream. They are far more likely to buy cheap chinese knockoffs and reverse engineer that.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Victor III vs Akula:

http://i.imgur.com/ESeDu2P.jpg

Akula II vs Oscar II: :mrgreen:

http://i.imgur.com/8f8KWcP.jpg
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Singha »

Oscar is a well fed nota bhai type.
Akula is the lean chota bhai
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Cosmo_R »

Aditya G wrote:Victor III vs Akula:

http://i.imgur.com/ESeDu2P.jpg

Akula II vs Oscar II: :mrgreen:

http://i.imgur.com/8f8KWcP.jpg
I think this is Typhoon v Oscar II

https://rwhiston.files.wordpress.com/20 ... uke_17.jpg
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

More on the fore aboard an Oscar class SSGN under repair in Russia. If the inner compartments were safe,then the damage will be limited though it will certainly delay the refit by several months.I wonder how the insulation between the twin-hulls is going to be replaced. This was not an operational sub,but one being put back into action after some time.The Oscar class have considerable firepower and were meant to be carrier-killers during Soviet times,one Oscar for every US carrier.

There have been over 200 accidents aboard subs involving various navies during the past 25 years according to sources,showing just how dangerous it is operating N-subs. A deliberate act of arson by a painter a few years ago saw a US nuclear Los Angeles class attack sub the USS Miami which was undergoing repairs ,condemned after its repair cost was estimated at $700m.

Reports:
Xcpt:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/d ... -fire-crew
A massive fire was put out on a docked Russian nuclear submarine outside the north-western city of Murmansk as some crew members remained inside, officials said.

Military prosecutors have launched an investigation into whether safety regulations were breached, and the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, summoned top cabinet officials to report on the situation and demanded punishment for those responsible.

The fire broke out on Thursday at an Arctic shipyard where the submarine Yekaterinburg was in dry dock. Firefighters continued to spray the vessel with water to cool it down.

Russian state television earlier showed the rubber-coated hull of the submarine still smoldering, with firefighters standing on top to douse it with water.
Seven members of the submarine crew were taken to hospital after inhaling carbon monoxide fumes.

An unspecified number of crew remained inside the submarine during the fire, a defence ministry spokesman said in a statement. He insisted there never was any danger of the fire spreading inside the sub and said the crew reported that the conditions on board remained normal.
https://news.vice.com/article/submarine ... [b]Russian nuclear submarine fire 'put out' in Arctic dock[/b]
7 April 2015

Smoke is seen rising from the Russian nuclear submarine Orel on 7 April 2015
The Orel is not believed to have had weapons or nuclear fuel on board

A fire that broke out on a Russian nuclear submarine at an Arctic naval shipyard has been put out, Russian media report.

The blaze on the Orel began at a Severodvinsk shipyard during repairs.

There were no weapons or nuclear fuel on board the Oscar-II class vessel at the time of the incident and there were no reports of any casualties.

A shipyard's spokesman said that no environmental or radioactive contamination had occurred.

The Russian Investigative Committee has announced that it is launching an investigation into alleged safety violations that could have started the blaze during the repairs.

'Only steam'

"The source of the smoke on the submarine Orel, which is undergoing a refit at Zvezdochka [shipyard], has been completely put out," said shipyard spokesman Yevgeny Gladyshev, quoted by Interfax news agency.

"Smoke is no longer coming out, only steam."

He added that the vessel's dock had been submerged in water in order to put out the fire and that the submarine's hull was still being doused in water from above.

Earlier, Mr Gladyshev told Tass news agency that the water would not cause any damage to the equipment inside the submarine because the inner hull remained closed.

Heavy smoke is seen coming from the Russian nuclear submarine Orel on 7 April 2015

The Orel was submerged in water in order to put out the fire.

A spokesman for the corporation which runs the shipyard, Ilya Zhitomirsky, told the Associated Press news agency that the critical parts of the submarine's nuclear reactor had been removed long before the repair work had begun.

The Orel submarine joined the Northern Fleet's base in Murmansk region in 1992, reports say, and on operations it is armed with anti-ship missiles.

It was moved for repairs to Severodvinsk, a city near Arkhangelsk on the White Sea, in 2013.

Local media said that the blaze on the 155m-long (500ft) submarine began when some insulation material caught fire during welding work.

In 2011, the Yekaterinburg nuclear submarine was damaged in a huge fire during repairs in the northern Murmansk region.

Nine people were hurt fighting the blaze that started after the submarine's rubber-coated outer hull caught fire.
[/quote]
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.adn.com/article/20150410/fir ... e-repaired
Fire-damaged Russian submarine to be repaired
Trude Pettersen, Barents Observer|

April 10, 2015

The nuclear submarine Oryol was not seriously damaged in a fire Tuesday at the Zvezdochka shipyard 620 miles north of Moscow, and will be ready for service again by the end of next year.

According to preliminary inspections of the Oryol, no important infrastructure was damaged in the fire on Tuesday, and the shipyard will have the vessel ready according to the original plan by the fourth quarter of 2016, a representative from the shipyard told Vedomosti. Any extra work caused by the fire, the shipyard will perform at its own expense, he added.

Related:
Russia starts construction of fifth multirole nuclear submarine
Russia tests submarine rescue capsule

A special commission has arrived in Severodvinsk to inspect the damages. Also The commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, Viktor Chirkov, and the commander of the Northern Fleet, Rear Admiral Vladimir Korolev, arrived in Severodvinsk on Tuesday.

More than 80 firefighters and 20 fire trucks were involved in the work to extinguish the fire, which occurred at around 2 p.m. Moscow time during hot works on the submarine, the Ministry of Emergency Situation’s website says..

The fire was not extinguished until after midnight Moscow time, after the dock with the submarine had been flooded.

The vessels reactor had been shut down and the fuel had been unloaded before the repairs started. The submarine had no weapons onboard, Zvezdochka reports.

One of many accidents

Tuesday’s accident was the latest in a series of accidents that have occurred at Zvezdochka and other ship repair yards in Northwest Russia during the last years.

On December 29, 2011 a fire broke out on the nuclear-powered Delta IV-class submarine Yekaterinburg while it was in a floating dock at the naval yard Roslyakovo just north of the town of Murmansk on the Kola Peninsula. According to the first official reports the fire only harmed the outer rubber coating of the submarine, and all the missiles had removed from the vessel before going in dock. Later Northern Fleet officials admitted that the submarine had both missiles and torpedoes on board. The Yekaterinburg was re-launched in June 2014, after two years of repairs.

In March 2014, during decommissioning work on the Oscar-II class nuclear submarine Krasnodar at the Nerpa naval yard north of Murmansk, the rubber on the outer hull of the submarine caught fire. There were no radioactive leakages, and no one was hurt in the accident.

Tuesday’s accident was the seventh at Zvezdochka in ten years, according to RIANovosti. The other accidents were:

February 19 2010: Fire during dismantling of the Akula-class nuclear submarine K-480 Ak Bars. No casualties. Cause of fire: violation of fire safety during hot works. December 11 2009: Leak of two cubic meters of liquid radioactive waste from a broken pipeline. No casualties, no radioactive waste leaked into the environment. October 6 2009: Fire during dismantling of the Yankee-class nuclear submarine K-403 Kazan. The fire occurred during use of gas-flame cutter. Workers evacuated, no casualties. March 25 2009: Fire during dismantling of the Yankee-class nuclear submarine K-411 Orenburg. The rubber coating of the vessel caught fire during hot works. No casualties. July 26 2007: The main ballast tank of a nuclear submarine in dry dock was punctured as a result of excess air pressure. No casualties. August 1 2005: Two people died in a fire during dismantling of an Akula-class nuclear submarine. Cause of the fire was ignition of vapors of fuel and lubricants during hot works.

This story is posted on Alaska Dispatch News as part of Eye on the Arctic, a collaborative partnership between public and private circumpolar media organizations.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Commemorative Type 093 submarine coin reveals construction date

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0412000157
Commemorative Type 093 submarine coin reveals construction date

Staff Reporter 2015-04-12 16:17 (GMT+8)

The coin with the words, "Commemorating the construction of the first nuclear-powered Type 093 submarine," followed by the date. (Internet photo)

The release of 2,000 commemorative coins for China's Type 093 Shang-class nuclear-powered attack submarine accidentally revealed the starting construction date of the vessel, according to the Shanghai-based Guancha Syndicate.

Each coin is marked with the construction date as beginning in December 1998. The first Type 093 attack submarine was launched officially in 2003.

The People's Liberation Army Navy has several Shang-class submarines in service. Photos on the internet indicate that China may have three additional modified versions of the submarine, called the Type 093G, according to the report.

Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo of the PLA Navy said that the existence of the Type 093G has not been confirmed yet by the Chinese military. However, the modified submarine is supposedly capable of simultaneously launching two or more anti-ship missiles and launching missiles vertically, similar to many of its American counterparts, he added. The speed of the missiles would be too fast for any enemy fleet air defense systems to intercept, according to the admiral.


http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0412000070
China's J-31 stealth fighter may have VTOL capability: expert

Staff Reporter 2015-04-12 12:31 (GMT+8)
A J-31 fighter prepares to land. (Internet photo)

In building up its military might in the South China Sea, China is likely to re-design its second fifth-generation stealth fighter, the J-31, with vertical takeoff and landing capabilities, according to Vasily Kashin, a Russian military expert cited in the Moscow-based Sputnik News.

China is constructing its first amphibious assault ship to prepare the People's Liberation Army Navy for possible conflict in the disputed regions of the South China Sea. Once construction of the vessel is completed, only fighters with vertical takeoff and landing gear will be able to deploy aboard the amphibious assault ship's flight deck. In this way, the PLA Navy will have a light aircraft carrier suitable for combat around the disputed Spratly islands.

The J-31 shares a similar fuselage to the F-35 fighter designed by Lockheed Martin, according to the report. Since the United States has developed a F-35B fighter with vertical takeoff and landing gear, China will apply the same strategy to the J-31.

Russia is currently one of the only two nations in the world with experience in designing carrier-based fighters capable of vertical takeoff and landing. China should exploit this connection to strengthen its cooperation with Russia, Kashin said.
*This is what our amphibs should also be capable of,equipped with a ski-jump so that STOBAR/STOVL ops can be carried out as we also have to defend our islands territories in the IOR and security for friendly nations.The NLCA could even be adapted to operate from our planned 35,000t+ amphibs.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Hilarious! don't know how many BRF johnnies remember a Hollywood comedy,"the Russians are coming..",made during the Cold War when xenophobia and paranoia ruled the day in the US about a Russian invasion. The great Swedish sub hunt has in fact been found to be a bogus hunt,which seemed to be carefully orchestrated to justify a huge increase in Swedish defence spending.The same propaganda tactic was used by the US/West over the MH flight shor down over the UKR and bogus stories of Russian tanks,troops,etc. swarming all over the eastern UKR/Donetsk Republic!

Read on.

http://rt.com/news/249109-sweden-submar ... -workboat/
Sweden confirms mystery ‘Russian sub’…was in fact a workboat
Published time: April 13, 2015

ARCHIVE PHOTO: Swedish corvette HMS Visby patrols the Stockholm Archipelago October 19 2014, searching for what the military says is a foreign threat in the waters (Reuters / Marko Savala)

The unknown foreign vessel the Swedish Navy searched for near Stockholm last autumn was actually a “workboat,” a senior navy official says. Local media had alleged a hunt was on to try and find a Russian submarine, which was believed to be in the area.

Swedish Rear Admiral Anders Grenstad told the Swedish TT news agency on Saturday that what was thought to be a vessel or a foreign submarine was actually just a “workboat.”


Swedish military wants $700mn to hunt subs after autumn ‘chase’


The Swedish Navy changed the wording from “probable submarine” to “non-submarine” when referring to the reconnaissance mission connected to the unidentified vessel spotted in the Stockholm archipelago.

The massive hunt was used by the Swedish Defense Ministry to justify a six billion kronor ($696 million) hike in defense spending between 2016 and 2020.

The drama started after an amateur photograph of an alleged underwater vessel of unidentified origin was sent to the ministry. The man who took the photo raised the alarm because he thought he saw the object surface and disappear again.

Sweden undertook an intense one-week search in late October, looking for possible “foreign underwater activity” near Stockholm. During the operation, the Swedish Navy reportedly used over 200 troops, helicopters, stealth ships and minesweepers to search the waters of the Baltic Sea.

​Sweden deploys troops near Stockholm due to alleged underwater threat

During the search, the Swedish media exaggerated the story, claiming country’s navy was looking for a submarine in the Baltic Sea, which allegedly belonged to Russia.

Meanwhile, naval officials from Sweden and Russia maintained there was no substance to the reports, which was confirmed by Grenstad.

“From the information we have, we cannot draw the same conclusion as the media that there is a damaged U-boat. We have no information about an emergency signal or the use of an emergency channel,” the navy official said.

A full report of the search operations will be published later this spring, the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet reported
Israel to get another N-armed German U-boat.REports say that it may acquire upto 9 suns with N-missiles

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/ ... SunCZv9ljo
Germany Approves Fifth 'Special' Submarine for Israel
Answer to Iran deal? Germany gives green light to new advanced sub that can hold nuclear weapons.
By Hillel Fendel

First Publish: 4/13/2015,
Germany has approved the delivery of the fifth of six promised submarines to Israel – amid claims that the sub will be outfitted with nuclear weapons. Is this part of Israel's answer to the US nuclear agreement with Iran?

The German Federal Security Council, which monitors Germany's export of military goods, has given the green light for the delivery of another submarine to Israel. The news has renewed claims that Israel will fit the sub with one or more nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

The six submarines ordered by Israel several years ago have been and are being built by the German shipyard HDW in Kiel. Four submarines have already been delivered to Israel; the last one, the INS Tanin, was handed over to Israel last September. Vice Admiral Ram Rotberg said at the time that it "can dive deeper, go farther for a longer time and can operate at a level we have not seen until today.”

The fifth submarine, and the latest to be approved, will be the INS Rahav. A sixth one is to be delivered by 2017, and Israel has even been reported to be interested in ordering three more.

Germany's Spiegel news outlet has often reported that by supplying Israel with the submarines, Germany is actually "helping Israel develop its military nuclear capabilities." Spiegel has quoted former Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak as saying that Germans should be "proud" that they have secured the existence of the state of Israel "for many years."

The submarine missiles can be launched using a previously secret hydraulic ejection system.

Coincidentally or not, controversial Egyptian TV presenter Tawfik Okasha called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu over the weekend to bomb Iran – and promised Egyptian support for "our dear friend Netanyahu,"

Okasha said. "Please, Iran faces you and the Bushehr reactor faces you. Put your trust in Allah and bomb it. We are with you. And if you need fuel for the jets, we will give it to you."
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Some new pictures of the LRASM (including some testing) and a full article talking to its program lead

Image

Image

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=2610
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

A huge development in sub/naval warfare.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015 ... rines.html
Navy to Deploy First Underwater Drones from Submarines
Military.com Apr 13, 2015 | by Kris Osborn

The Navy will deploy its first underwater drones from Virginia-class attack submarines for the first time in history later this year, the Navy's director of undersea warfare said Monday.

The deployment will include the use of the Remus 600 Unmanned Underwater Vehicles, or UUVs, performing undersea missions in strategic locations around the globe, Rear Adm. Joseph Tofalo, told Military.com at the Navy League's Sea Air Space annual symposium at National Harbor, Md.

"Now you are talking about a submarine CO who can essentially be in two places at the same time – with a UUV out deployed which can do dull, dirty and dangerous type missions.
This allows the submarine to be doing something else at the same time," Tofalo said. "UUVs can help us better meet our combatant command demand signal. Right now, we only meet about two-thirds of our combatant commanders demand signals and having unmanned systems is a huge force multiplier."

The Remus 600 is a 500-pound, 3.25-meter long UUV equipped with dual-frequency side-scanning sonar technology, synthetic aperture sonar, acoustic imaging, video cameras and GPS devices, according to information from its maker, Hyrdoid.

The Remus 600 is similar to the BLUEFIN Robotics UUVs, such as the BLUEFIN 21, that were used to scan the ocean floor in search of the wreckage of the downed Malaysian airliner last year.

The upcoming deployment of the Remus 600 is part of a larger Navy effort to use existing commercial off-the-shelf technology, Tofalo explained.

"We're using commercial off-the-shelf technologies to do real world missions for the combatant commander. The oil and gas industry uses these things for all kinds of functions. The submarine force will be adapting this. The sensors are similar to the sensors that the oil and gas industry might use. They might be surveying where their oil pipes are, whereas we might want to be looking for a mine field," Tofalo said.

The Remus 600s will launch from a 11-meter long module on the Virginia-class submarines called the dry deck shelter which can launch divers and UUVs while submerged.


Related Video

Sonar technology uses acoustic or sound-wave technology to bounce signals off an object and analyze their return to learn the size, shape, distance and dimensions, Tofalo explained.

"It is similar to radar (electromagnetic) except from an acoustic standpoint. Sonar sensors use acoustics to create a picture that a trained operator can use to discern what they are looking at. It has gotten so good that it is almost like looking at a picture," he added.

Alongside efforts to make preparations for the first deployment of commercially available UUVs from the Virginia-class attack submarines, the Navy is also planning at-sea tests this year of a UUV launching technology which uses the boat's torpedo tubes. The at-sea test will examine the technological interface between a UUV and the missile tube as a launcher, Tofalo explained.

The Navy has been working on developing an 85-foot long section of the Virginia-class submarines called the Virginia Payload Modules. This would help submarines launch both missiles and UUVs from the submarine.

"For the large diameter UUV itself, what we want to have is an interface that allows it to come out of that Virginia Payload Module tube. To do that we need an arm that can extend itself with a little platform that can extend itself and go to the vertical," Tofalo said.

At the same time, the Office of Naval Research is preparing to unveil a new autonomous 30-foot UUV prototype called the Large Displacement Unmanned Undersea Vehicle, or LDUUV.

The LDUUV is a prototype which may take a variety of different forms in coming years as the technology evolves, said Bob Freeman, ONR spokesman. The LDUUV is being engineered for greater endurance and energy, he added. It will also be autonomous and able to navigate itself through the undersea domain.

Alongside UUVs, the Navy is also experimenting with launching aerial drones from submarines as well, Tofalo said.

The service is testing the Switchblade, which can launch from a small signal injector tube from the side of the submarine. The Switchblade, built by AeroVironment, is a battery-powered unmanned aerial vehicle that can carry three pounds worth of explosives, Tofalo added.

He added that the Navy is also testing a longer-endurance submarine-launched UAV called XFC, an acronym for experimental fuel cell. XFC, which can be launched from a torpedo tube, can stay in the air for nine to ten hours.

"These are ways that a submarine can extend its horizon. They have been tested and we're continuing to work on making them more definitive programs of record," Tofalo said.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Boeing International F-18F cockpit Layout. They still think they will secure a new customer in the Middile East for this launch

Image
kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by kmkraoind »

Japan and US enclose Chinese coast within sensor net

It seems all Chinese sea neighbors (Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam) are teaming up to counter their bully neighbor.
Indonesia and India, both historic adherents of non-alignment despite recent warming to the US in the face of rising Chinese power, would be loath to admit to allowing the Americans to wire up their nearby waters, and would be perhaps even more embarrassed to learn that it had been done without their permission or knowledge.
Since IOR hosts Diego Garcia, I will not be surprised if already US has fish hook net from Straits of Malacca to Suez Canal to Madagascar.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Singha »

however none have been able to counter the chinese enlarging the reefs in the south china sea to create airbases and harbours where no doubt LRMP birds, drones and ASW patrol craft will operate from to sanitize the region for their SSBN fleet.

we ought to enclose the bay of bengal and AN islands in our own sensor net....the surface is being taken care of with massive coastal radar network, now we need to lock-in the underwater domain also to give our SSBNs a nice starter sandbox to grow up in.

as I mentioned a while back cheen only has a deep hole area west of philipines to play safely in for deep dived subs...rest if all 150m or less...totally useless for hiding subs.

maybe thats why they want to tightly secure that hole using reef squatters and beef up their DF41+ land based kit in parallel....I would ignore their SSBN assets and focus on their land based missiles as thats of primary concern for us.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

22350M modified Gorshkov class

http://i.imgur.com/2YkyULp.jpg
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Austin,is there a second SAM/missile system as well (apart from the 32 cell VLS module forward in "B" position) on either side of the SSM silos and aft of the funnel? Any idea what type? Along with the Kashtan CIWS system on either side of the hangar ,this would make for a v.heavily armed frigate.Excellent shaping of the main mast too.

Putin has made the nuclear question even more complicated – and Trident may not be the answer
Paul Mason
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -deterrent
In March, the Russian ambassador to Denmark told Copenhagen that, by electing to deploy American missiles that can shoot down Russian nuclear ones, its navy had become a legitimate target for a Russian nuclear strike, should it ever come to war.

Though it caused outrage in diplomatic circles – and renewed fears that Vladimir Putin’s next target lies in the Baltic – once you understand the concept of deterrence, the Russians were only stating the obvious: “Since you have a weapon that can kill our weapon, we must kill your weapon before we fire ours.”

Here we are having a debate about our own nuclear deterrent: or rather, half a debate. At present, the argument focuses on whether to scrap or renew Trident; or to replace it with cruise missiles, which fly more slowly and carry fewer warheads.

But some in the defence world believe the whole debate is deluded. Trident, in its current form, was designed to deliver “minimum deterrence” – that is, using as little force as possible to threaten Russia with “unacceptable loss”. The method is to maintain at least one submarine continually at sea, armed with up to 12 missiles, each capable of dropping eight warheads on to enemy cities.

But few people understand that the UK’s nuclear deterrent is a system – not a technology – and one that must constantly evolve as the threat changes.

For a nuclear-armed submarine to pose a credible threat, it must avoid being tracked by Russian submarines. To do that it must get out of the River Clyde and, once at sea, be protected by aircraft trying to spot the Russian subs, plus an undersea surveillance system whose sensors are scattered across the ocean bed. On top of that, those controlling Trident must engage in a data-crunching battle with the Russian navy, whereby each side uses predictive modelling to guess where the other’s subs will be.


Advertisement



For informed critics and supporters of Trident, the difficulties start here. In 2010, David Cameron cancelled a programme to upgrade the Nimrod surveillance aircraft tasked to look for the Russian subs. The UK’s are now protected only by helicopters and ships.

The new problem is that Russian attack submarines are parked close to Britain’s shore with increased frequency. Unlike the Russian bombers now ranging over Scotland and Cornwall, these submarines cannot be seen, and the MoD will not comment on submarine operations. But the circumstantial evidence is there.

In January, Britain had to call in two US surveillance planes to help track a Russian sub. This week, a UK fishing boat snagged what it believed was a Russian submarine just off the Isle of Man. HMS Talent, an attack submarine whose job is to hunt its Russian counterparts, had its turret damaged by “floating ice” – which was the old, cold war euphemism for collision with a Russian vessel.

So, the first awkward question is: if Trident plus Nimrod was a “minimum” defence option against a Russia that had given up aggression, how is Trident minus Nimrod still an adequate system, given this increased Russian submarine activity?

The second, much bigger question is: what is the renewed Trident actually supposed to deter?

During the cold war, deterrence was designed to make the Soviet Union reconsider invading western Europe with conventional forces. But with Vladimir Putin’s sudden turn to proxy warfare in Ukraine, and with Russia blocking UN action against a Syrian regime that has openly used chemical warfare, you are dealing with a completely different situation.

Putin is KGB-trained, and many of Russia’s old military doctrines still operate – but we are not dealing with like for like. There is no Politburo and no Marxism. The Soviets derived their version of blitzkrieg from an idea about economic warfare pioneered by Mikhail Tukhachevsky: assault the enemy throughout the depth of his formation. They were playing a long, relatively predictable game.

With Putin, nobody is sure what the game even is. Nothing Ukraine’s allies did deterred Russia from seizing first Crimea and now eastern Ukraine. Sanctions had no effect and various Nato countries are reduced to bilateral aid to Ukraine, since the alliance itself is split.

Plus, the politics of Europe are now different. Today the threat is to Baltic states towards whom there is scant solidarity among the populations of the original Nato countries. Meanwhile Putin’s Russia has far more support among the British financial elite than the Soviet Union ever had in the British labour movement.

General Sir Richard Shirreff, Nato’s former deputy supreme commander in Europe, told me: “What is completely missing is an understanding in the national debate that we face a game-changer in what Putin has done. If he did decide to try and have a crack at the Baltic states, people really need to understand that that means war.”

But they don’t – and in part that is due to the lack of coherence to the public debate.

There is no published Ministry of Defence evaluation as to whether the current Trident system is sufficient to deter the new, unpredictable Putin – either from invading Estonia or nuking the Danish navy. All published UK research, for and against Trident, is pre-2014 – and assumes the threat of war with Russia is close to zero.

The unpalatable truth – for those who believe in nuclear deterrence – may be that four new submarines are not enough. All the things touted as alternatives to the current Trident system – cruise missiles, free-fall bombs and static silos – might be needed on top of it. Without a clear, public assessment of the new threat, nobody knows what the new minimum deterrent really is, or if it can deter at all.

For those who oppose nuclear deterrence as a concept, the challenge is to spell out an alternative doctrine to deal with the Russian threat.

But in the election debates, we’re getting neither of the above. We’re getting instead, from all sides, a contested shopping list, whose relevance to the worsening global security situation is not immediately obvious.

Paul Mason is Channel 4 News economics editor. Watch his report on Britain’s defence options.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

Philip wrote:Austin,is there a second SAM/missile system as well (apart from the 32 cell VLS module forward in "B" position) on either side of the SSM silos and aft of the funnel? Any idea what type? Along with the Kashtan CIWS system on either side of the hangar ,this would make for a v.heavily armed frigate.Excellent shaping of the main mast too.
The VLS is not 32 but 28 on Gorskhov-M , A2A VLS is reduced to 2 x 14 from 4 x 8, but they are bigger even than the UKSK, and pack the larger S-400 and maybe S-500 missiles

The second SAM/Missile hatch amidship could just be service hatch for loading cargo. The CIWS is not kashtan but naval version of Pantsir-M2 each with 16 SAM
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Tx.Are the S-400,etc SAMs more capable than our B-8s in the area defence role? has there been any comparative study so far?

PS:Interesting article on whether the USN can defeat BMos.
http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/12/27/e ... s-missile/
Explained – Can The US Navy Can Shoot Down The Deadly BrahMos Missile?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

Philip wrote:Tx.Are the S-400,etc SAMs more capable than our B-8s in the area defence role? has there been any comparative study so far?
So far they have navalised two missile of S-400 series 9M96E and 9M96E2 with range 40 and 120 km ,
The entire system is called Redoute-Poliment , Poliment is the AESA radar.

More details here including pics http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-13.html , Just use the english translation conversion on the page

No comparative study but Aster-30 , Barak-8 and 9M96 should be equally capable in its role
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Austin »

Launched on the submarine "Krasnodar"

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1278480.html
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Philip wrote:Tx.Are the S-400,etc SAMs more capable than our B-8s in the area defence role? has there been any comparative study so far?

PS:Interesting article on whether the USN can defeat BMos.
http://defencyclopedia.com/2014/12/27/e ... s-missile/
Explained – Can The US Navy Can Shoot Down The Deadly BrahMos Missile?
Per article Barak-8 is the only missile that can shoot down Brahmos/Yakhont/Onyx.

That IMHO explains one of the reasons behind Indo-Israreli JV.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Per article Barak-8 is the only missile that can shoot down Brahmos/Yakhont/Onyx
The link is wrong, and the article has been posted before and its quite mediocre in its analysis. Although there is absolutely no way to actually test 1 vs 1 scenario but there are other missiles out there that have shot Mach 2.5 sea skimming targets, and supersonic Mach 3 targets at medium altitudes from stand off ranges. The ESSM has done this on multiple occasions. The French borrowed a GQM-163 from the USN and shot it down, and the SM6 has targeted the GQM-163 at long ranges while in the "cruise mode" (Mach 3+). The GQM-163 ((It has a terminal manuver) is now actively used as a target and in addition to physical tests it is a standard modeling in the virtual world. Not sure what targets Barack-8 has been tested against.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=2073

Image

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Wfi3wW3nps8/T ... neuver.jpg
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

France bites the bullet,to pay back $1B+ to Russia as penalty for the Mistral deal. An opportunity for India to design a common platform for our requirement for amphibs and sell the same to Russia?

http://rt.com/news/253161-france-russia-mistral-ships/
France will pay €1.1 bn to Russia for cancelled Mistral ships - report
Published time: April 26, 2015
France plans to pay back costs for the Mistral helicopter carriers ordered by Russia if they are not delivered, returning €800 million and paying compensation for other expenses totaling €300 million, French media reports citing government sources.

Paris is expected to fund the compensation from €2 billion that Poland will pay to buy French helicopters, according to Le Journal du Dimanche.

The decision on compensating Russian costs for the Mistral ships hasn’t yet been legally formalized; however France and Russia will take another month to set the exact terms of the annulment of the contract for the Mistral war ships.
Read more

‘Good jokes are appropriate, but so is honoring contracts’ – Kremlin comments on Mistral prank

In addition, Russia will give France the right to resell the two helicopter carriers, the newspaper says adding that some NATO countries have already shown interest in buying them.


Earlier this week French President Francois Hollande agreed that the funds should be returned to Russia if it doesn’t receive the ships. However, he added that currently it’s impossible to deliver them to Russia because of the situation in Ukraine.

The contract for the delivery of the Mistral helicopter carriers was signed between the French company DCNS/STX and Russia’s arms distributor Rosoboronexport in 2011.

France was expected to handover the first ship in November 2014, but the delivery has been postponed indefinitely partly due to pressure on France by the US and the EU, which imposed a series of sanctions against Moscow over its accession of Crimea and alleged involvement in the Ukrainian crisis.
Post Reply