Re: Indian Naval Discussion

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2531
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby tsarkar » 22 Aug 2013 15:25

^^ Correct, probable causes can be manufacturing defect.

Weapons are handled in cradles and the notion of "man"handling, "dropping" are a bit far fetched. The XO was supervising, and I'm sure logistics & armament officers were present. If any such dropping incident happened, then the loading process would've stopped, and the weapon would've been sent back to depot to be thoroughly inspected.

Prima-facie looks like a sympathetic detonation of the propellants rather than warheads, that have multiple safeties.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22326
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Austin » 22 Aug 2013 15:32

Manufacturing Defect wont go unnoticed as Weapons these days have Built in Test Facility etc that can show the health of weapons. Weapons are also externally checked for any manufacturing defects.

Where weapons can end up having defect is improper storage , improper weapons handling and not following process while loading the weapons etc.

Its too early to say what could be the case and chances are its very hard to find out as well both due to explosion and subsequent sinking where probably forsenic evidence if exist lost due to sea water corrision etc ......they would be lucky to find some hard evidence

Even the Kursk Incident when a Type 65 was blamed at improper storage of weapons and the crack which developed a leak which went unnoticed during loading. The manufacturer subsequently did many test including dropping a live torpedo on ground from certain height but it didnt explode. Which lead to the conclusion that there was no fault in the design of the weapon but how it was stored and loaded.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2531
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby tsarkar » 22 Aug 2013 15:47

^^ Not design, but manufacture. There were manufacturing QA issues with R77 discovered much later. Metullurgical flaws, metal fatigue are notoriously difficult to find, and normal maintenance processes or BITE cannot detect them.

Anyways, let the results come out.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22326
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Austin » 22 Aug 2013 15:55

We have been operation Kilo since 86 if memory serves me right and this particular Submarine already had a fire before with no loss fortunately though second time it wasnt that lucky. Perhaps the only major accident on Kilo in 26 years of operations in IN.

Hopefully we come to know the truth soon.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12964
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Lalmohan » 22 Aug 2013 16:34

in the previous fire, one sailor was killed

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22326
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Austin » 22 Aug 2013 16:42

Yes and indeed unfortunate too.....There was also an incident of Kilo Submarine while Surfacing and hitting a merchant ship somewhere deep in the sea but nothing major happened and they managed to reach the shore safely.

member_27444
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby member_27444 » 22 Aug 2013 19:18

It is now establish fact that 10 meters of gash or gaping hole in the front portion of the sub.

That is rougly 33 fet wide opening of both inner and outer hull.

now if the hatches were all closed except a few (one or two for maneuvering) then the sub should have

sunk with front goinging down with tail up in the air momentarily

like the usual dive with front of sub getting submerged ( of course in normal dive the tail will not be air borne)

If the sub sank flat on its belly then it means the all the hatches were open or partially the sub would sink more slowly....

in all probality the sub sank really fast engulfed in flames and would the fires be extingueshed by gushing water? depends on the chemicals burning....

is fire damage more extensive or explosive damage extensive?

I f fire then lot fuel of rockest and tarpedos burt out
if not the explosion more of implosion only few exploded. (not the war heads)


IN MVHO it was sub sinking with nose fron but quickly setteled to submersion flat on its bed.

Also any contaminated water in the diving ballast tanks can tell us how many hatches were blown off or punctured....
the three sailors who jumped ship / submarine could explain a lot of the events

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 497
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby SNaik » 22 Aug 2013 20:02

The boat was in the last hours of preparation before sailing on mission, a lot of cargo being loaded, weapons as well, it is a safe bet that the hatches between compartments were open.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1560
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby wig » 23 Aug 2013 08:49

the defence minister updates on various aspects,
Not ruling out the “sabotage” angle behind explosions on Navy’s destroyed submarine INS Sindhurakshak, Defence Minister A K Antony today said the incident has cast a shadow on the force’s capability to safeguard country’s maritime interests.

Giving clarifications in the Rajya Sabha on the August 14 submarine accident, he said the Navy has also ordered a study to assess the status of weapons on board the sunk submarine in view of fear of any further explosion during salvage operations.

“The Navy has ordered a Board of Inquiry (BoI) and it has started with all seriousness. Its terms of reference is to look into all aspects of causes of this incident will be examined by it. Nothing is ruled out. All likely aspects would be examined by the BoI,” Antony said.

Several members including Chandan Mitra (BJP) and Naresh Agrawal (SP) sought to know if sabotage was one of the reasons behind the accident which took place on the eve of Independence Day.

The Defence Minister said at the moment, “We cannot say conclusively about the exact cause of the incident. Our armed forces work on war footing on these aspects and they are also anxious on this issue.”

The Minister said of the 18 personnel on board the sunken vessel, bodies of eight had been found till yesterday and they have been sent to the Naval hospital for postmortem. “Death certificates of eight bodies cite extensive burns as the cause of death.”

He said five international and Indian companies are involved in surveying the vessel for salvage and after the vessel is dewatered and brought up, the team of Russian experts would be involved in the investigations.

Antony said the accident and the sinking of the vessel has “cast a shadow on capability of the Navy to safeguard interest in the vast coastlines and maritime area especially in the emerging security scenario in the Indian Ocean Region and extended region.”

The Defence Minister said naval divers are submitting all the material “including metals and partially burnt yellow coloured material found near the jetty are being inspected by the Naval armament inspectors to ascertain its composition.”

On the status of weapons still on board the submarine, he said a team comprising the chief of naval armament depot and commanding officer of a missile base has been set up.

“The team has been asked to carry out a detailed study to assess the state of explosives on board and quantify the risk associated with salvage operations because there is fear about further explosions. So, we are trying to clear that,” he said.

Antony said the water sample from the torpedo compartment of the submarine has been analysed in a laboratory in Pune and “immediate analysis does not indicate any presence of TNT in the water samples and the partially burnt yellow material. Further investigation is underway.”

He said the submarine refitted in Russia for two years was most modern and it involved a “large amount” of money.

“I can assure you, on one side, we will leave no stone unturned to salvage this submarine at the earliest and after that, follow up with further action. Navy is taking all steps to salvage this submarine at earliest and try to find out exact reasons. After that we will study the salvaged parts of the submarine,” he said.

The Minister clarified that there was no system of insuring warships and submarines in the Navy and armed forces.

He said diving operations of naval personnel were on to find out the “state of weapons and for locating water breaches in the vessel”. (PTI)

Not ruling out the “sabotage” angle behind explosions on Navy’s destroyed submarine INS Sindhurakshak, Defence Minister A K Antony today said the incident has cast a shadow on the force’s capability to safeguard country’s maritime interests.

Giving clarifications in the Rajya Sabha on the August 14 submarine accident, he said the Navy has also ordered a study to assess the status of weapons on board the sunk submarine in view of fear of any further explosion during salvage operations.

“The Navy has ordered a Board of Inquiry (BoI) and it has started with all seriousness. Its terms of reference is to look into all aspects of causes of this incident will be examined by it. Nothing is ruled out. All likely aspects would be examined by the BoI,” Antony said.

Several members including Chandan Mitra (BJP) and Naresh Agrawal (SP) sought to know if sabotage was one of the reasons behind the accident which took place on the eve of Independence Day.

The Defence Minister said at the moment, “We cannot say conclusively about the exact cause of the incident. Our armed forces work on war footing on these aspects and they are also anxious on this issue.”

The Minister said of the 18 personnel on board the sunken vessel, bodies of eight had been found till yesterday and they have been sent to the Naval hospital for postmortem. “Death certificates of eight bodies cite extensive burns as the cause of death.”

He said five international and Indian companies are involved in surveying the vessel for salvage and after the vessel is dewatered and brought up, the team of Russian experts would be involved in the investigations.

Antony said the accident and the sinking of the vessel has “cast a shadow on capability of the Navy to safeguard interest in the vast coastlines and maritime area especially in the emerging security scenario in the Indian Ocean Region and extended region.”

The Defence Minister said naval divers are submitting all the material “including metals and partially burnt yellow coloured material found near the jetty are being inspected by the Naval armament inspectors to ascertain its composition.”

On the status of weapons still on board the submarine, he said a team comprising the chief of naval armament depot and commanding officer of a missile base has been set up.

“The team has been asked to carry out a detailed study to assess the state of explosives on board and quantify the risk associated with salvage operations because there is fear about further explosions. So, we are trying to clear that,” he said.

Antony said the water sample from the torpedo compartment of the submarine has been analysed in a laboratory in Pune and “immediate analysis does not indicate any presence of TNT in the water samples and the partially burnt yellow material. Further investigation is underway.”

He said the submarine refitted in Russia for two years was most modern and it involved a “large amount” of money.

“I can assure you, on one side, we will leave no stone unturned to salvage this submarine at the earliest and after that, follow up with further action. Navy is taking all steps to salvage this submarine at earliest and try to find out exact reasons. After that we will study the salvaged parts of the submarine,” he said.

The Minister clarified that there was no system of insuring warships and submarines in the Navy and armed forces.

He said diving operations of naval personnel were on to find out the “state of weapons and for locating water breaches in the vessel”.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50868
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby ramana » 23 Aug 2013 23:54

One team is looking at possibility that a stuxnet type virus was introduced either accidentally or deliberately during the refit.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12964
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Lalmohan » 24 Aug 2013 00:01

doesnt have to be during the refit, could be introduced through the navy network inadvertently too
(just like at natanz)

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby rajatmisra » 24 Aug 2013 10:36

If the sub was 73 m in length then we have to make a wall say 200 m in length around it in just about 50 feet of water. Does not look too difficult an engineering task and any good civil construction company should be able to do it in a few days. Dewater the pit and have a in-situ inspection which will also give more accurate pointers to the cause of explosion.
Is there something I am missing?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50868
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby ramana » 24 Aug 2013 10:52

The IN will raise the sub. Give them time.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50868
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby ramana » 25 Aug 2013 05:05

Two articles:

Late J. Dey in Midday 2009 circa:

Revist the 2009 J Dey article Dive of Death"

Gives reference to the Kargil era Karachi patrol

So doubters can be rest assured.


The article titled Dive of Death was an ironically apt headline for this Independence Day special story about the INS Sindhurakshak that MiD DAY correspondent, the late J DEY, wrote in 2009

While Indian soldiers faced the Pakistan army at Kargil, one summer night some time in May 1999, the INS Sindhurakshak, sailed out of Mumbai harbour. A few hours outside the city, the submarine dived and headed north off the coast of Pakistan.

Kargil
This was no ordinary patrol, as its captain (name withheld) knew full well. The Indian army was evicting Pakistani intruders from the Kargil heights and the Indian Air Force (IAF) was bombing the mountains in support of army operations.

Sea-borne
Both the eastern and western fleets of the Indian navy had been combined and deployed off the coast of Pakistan, waiting in case the war expanded. The possibility of a sea-borne attack could not be ruled out.

Submerged
For the next 46 days, as the army gallantly battled the enemy forcing them off the mountain tops, the Sindhurakshak stealthily prowled off Pakistan’s Makran coast, always submerged. The 60-member Sindhurakshak crew did not see sunlight for over a month.

Shark
At night, the 3,000 tonne steel shark came up a few meters from below the surface, just enough to stick out a ‘snort mast’ out of the water. This mast would suck in the air to run its onboard diesel engines. These would, in turn, charge its batteries, a process called ‘snorting’, the standard cycle of a conventional diesel-electric submarine. After charging batteries, it was back to the war patrol.

Attack
The crew spent their time practicing dummy attacks on ships entering and leaving Karachi harbour, which was within striking distance. A lot of the problems of, ‘positive identification’ of targets, which had prevented naval submarines from attacking targets off Karachi during the 1971 war, had been resolved. When the order for the attack came, the Sindhurakshak would unleash hell. The order never did come though.

Citation
The Sindhurakshak was pulled back to Mumbai from its lengthy deployment. Two other Indian submarines were similarly deployed on lengthy war patrols off Pakistan during Operation Vijay but the Sindhurakshak was the first. Its deployment opened the eyes of even naval planners to the capability of the navy’s submarine arm. The Sindhurakshak was awarded a unit citation after the war.

Silent
True to its motto of the submarine arm being a silent service, its story was never made known. Naval spokesperson, Capt. Manoharan N preferred to remain silent. “The position of the submarines are never made known,” he said. Below the rumble and crash of waves, submarines like Sindhurakshak, the silent warriors, pretend to sleep. When they wake, the world will tremble.

As the army battled the enemy forcing them off mountain tops, the Sindhurakshak stealthily prowled off Pakistan’s Makran coast, always submerged. The 60-member Sindhurakshak crew did not see sunlight for over a month.



and from Cdre C Uday Bhaskar

Tragedy in two parts

Please some one post it here.

Good part is the COI should issue its report in 4 weeks.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36102
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby SaiK » 25 Aug 2013 05:15

stuxnet on a democracy should be considered as first strike. let the net war begin.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Manish_Sharma » 25 Aug 2013 06:41

Maybe Ramana ji means it could be chinese or porki equivalents of 'stuxnet'.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36102
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby SaiK » 25 Aug 2013 08:11

what prevents us doing the same on others? i am not discounting any nation on the planet... we never know who is the real enemy at EoD... reason sabotage angle should not be trashed.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19695
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Philip » 25 Aug 2013 10:36

V.Sudarshan has this viewpoint rightly mentioning our declining sub fleet..However,he displays some "deep" ignorance,pardon the pun, of the capability of Akulas,equiv/ to late model Los Angeles class,one of which was undetected for weeks in the Gulf of Mexico in 2012.Add to that an earlier gen. It is anything but a museum piece.Sierra-2 SSGN (which the IN was reportedly very interested at one time) was just off the US coast by a mere 200 miles.He also forgets that the ATV will eventually carry the K-4 min. 1500km missile,which the Chinese themselves rate as having a range of 3000+ km.

That the ATV project would've been impossible without Russian help is well known.However,surely with a first sub,they would need to guide us at every step? Moreover,even if there has been considerable input in the reactor design,it has been built by us ,a first.The recent Frontline feature says that the Russians were amazed with the N-reactor simulator built by us at Vizag.Indian industry has been heavily involved in manufacturing the ATV.There was an old feature when the sub was launched in the "F" mag listing out the numerous Indian cos. involved and L&T's stellar role in manufacturing the hull,etc. Once we possess 3-4 SSBNs of the ATV and enlarged ATV class,we too like the PLAN can simply let our subs remain hidden in their sub pens ,deploy them in the IOR and hit any part of China in the unhoped for event of them being required.

Our blue water submarine?

By V Sudarshan

Published: 25th August 2013 07:09 AM

Last Updated: 25th August 2013 07:09 AM

The loss of INS Sindhurakshak has brought focus on the pitiable state of our far too few submarines. We had six missile-capable subs. In terms of deployability, at any given time only 60 per cent are available, which means only four subs could have been deployed. Now one is gone. Now our operational availability is less than three. This is not counting the loss of trained men who went under in such a tragic manner. It takes two years for the crew of one submarine to get battle-ready. If there were six stations that our submarines would have operated from during war time, one is no longer there. This creates large gaps in our security. I am told that in another five years, 90 per cent of our submarines would have been decommissioned if you rate them in terms of normal life. But we will no doubt persist, as we do; another jugaad in the great Indian tradition of strategic planning.

A big silver lining will no doubt be glimpsed over the reactor of our “indigenously developed” nuclear submarine Arihant going critical. I am no expert on nuclear submarines, but people who are privately laugh at our nuclear submarine. That is because it is based on designs from the Sixties, which is half-a-century old. It is the same as the Chakra which we hired earlier. To leading questions, our nuclear gurus answer that “our nuclear submarine is completely made in India, designed, fabricated, executed by Indian scientists”. Yet the Prime Minister has publicly thanked the Russians profusely for what is euphemistically being called “consultancy” work. The real credit should go to the Russians for their excellent super-mentoring-cum-monitoring on a Russian submarine with a Made in India mark. The Russians apparently were so heavily embedded in our nuclear submarine programme that every step that was taken was made possible only because of their behind-the-scenes omnipresence telling us which screw went where, how to weld this, do that...

You may ask: why quibble if the submarine works? The quibble enters the picture because after three more nuclear submarines, clones of the one that just went critical, have been produced over the next several years, we will still not have the ability to build a newer generation submarine from scratch. We simply don’t have the expertise for design, its validation or choice of material for a next generation submarine. Nobody knows where all that will come from. Russians gave us Chakra on a platter. They have since moved on and are now in the Borei class of submarines, compared to which Chakra is a museum piece.

Our nuclear submarine can carry nuclear missiles that can travel 750 km. The radius of that kind of a range is pretty small. We can’t fire a missile at China from the Bay of Bengal in this case, can we? The submarine needs to get pretty close to the Chinese coast undetected in order to pose a credible deterrence. How would you rate the feasibility of that happening undetected? The Chinese second-generation sea-launched intercontinental ballistic, the JL2, can deliver its payload, according to Wikipedia, 14,000 km away. Even if we discount that distance, it is evident the Chinese submarines need not traverse the Straits of Malacca in order to hit us anywhere they wish. They can hit us even as they sit pretty in the depths of the South China Sea. There is nothing we can do about that.

Sudarshan is most recently author of Adrift.

sudarshan@newindianexpress.com

member_27444
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby member_27444 » 25 Aug 2013 17:52

If I were to be MOD or any official esignate to salvage the SUb

I would declare a contents for ideas from various institues including CSIR, IITs IISc and so many engineering collages in the country to come up with solutions.

Give only generic data about the Sub and its pen.

There are so many creative ways that this can be done with ut foreign help. I think ONGS als has capacity to buile a under water rectangular container withquick setting cement and pile driving.....

we dont need to run to Norway, no way, unkil aunties.... our own armed forces have fought war with creativity this nothing bigger than what they have done and never get crdit for solving problems till 50 years later if at all revealed

Crowd sourcing is the name

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19695
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Philip » 25 Aug 2013 19:15

We have been operating the Kilo class for two decades now.Barring the battery fire on the same sub earlier,there have been no accidents whatsoever other than the odd collision.Collisions involving subs have been plentiful in navies both east and west.I remember a Victor class sub in the '80s which had a massive collision destroying a part of the bow /torpedo room,which clearly showed the intricate and tough double hull construction.None of the weaponry detonated.This accident is a first for any navy when a sub was being loaded in port.The Kursk loss was at sea during a firing exercise.The Thresher loss is also suspected to be due to a malfunctioning torpedo. From the little available info,the sub was being loaded in haste so that it could set off on patrol on time.Perhaps safety corners were cut or a genuine accident took place that was not anticipated.Let's wait.Forensic material will be very difficult to obtain because of the state of the sub,silt inside,etc.Even if it was a malfunctioning piece of ordnance,the intensity of the blast would've destroyed almost everything.However,from the salvage to should be able to determine which ordnance exploded and which survived.That should give us a clue,as the loading procedure would be std. practice and if there is any CCTV footage too,it would be of immense help.

An outside theory is that something lethal/incendiary could've been loaded along with the other sub stores down the main hatch which could've set off a fire that reached the torpedo room,hatches being open.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36102
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby SaiK » 25 Aug 2013 20:31

@EoD thoughts, as long as there was none in the name of suicide bomber or sabotage, I am okay with accidents... we have a point to learn here, or a case here to counter attack an act of war.

member_27444
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby member_27444 » 25 Aug 2013 21:08

While the human loss can never be replaced...

This sub can be a treasure trove for designing, operation safety, SOPs and a very huge learning object for engineering.

We have all the resources in the country to salvage and also learn from this.

It's just matter of leadership discipline and dedication of the top leadership which then percolates to lower officers and sailors.

I have a huge emotional stake in this....

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 497
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby SNaik » 26 Aug 2013 13:30

rajatmisra wrote:If the sub was 73 m in length then we have to make a wall say 200 m in length around it in just about 50 feet of water. Does not look too difficult an engineering task and any good civil construction company should be able to do it in a few days. Dewater the pit and have a in-situ inspection which will also give more accurate pointers to the cause of explosion.
Is there something I am missing?


Indeed, building a caisson around the sunken sub seems the most logical approach, given the uncertainty of the safety of the weapons still on board.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 64013
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Singha » 26 Aug 2013 15:37

building caissons is sop in bridges going over rivers and seas. in mumbai itself was surely done for worli sea link and trans harbour link
this structure is about length of the kilo and much wider. looks like a simple and well understood procedure
http://your.kingcounty.gov/kcdot/roads/ ... AISSON.jpg

Pranay
BRFite
Posts: 1463
Joined: 06 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Pranay » 26 Aug 2013 18:09

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 059048.cms

Navy divers have retrieved three more bodies from INS Sindhurakshak which had sunk on August 14 following multiple explosions, taking the total number of bodies recovered from the submarine to 10.

One of the three bodies was found on Friday in the submarine's fourth compartment, which is its engine room. The other two bodies were found over the weekend.


Defence officials said half of the submarine was buried in silt. The submarine is being surveyed by six companies-Titan Salvage and SMIT from Singapore, Ocean Centre Diving from New Zealand, Arihant Shipping and Duke Offshore from India and Graph Technical Marine, an European firm.

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby rajatmisra » 26 Aug 2013 18:36

I don't know the width of entrance to the harbour (google maps should give a good idea), but if the channel is narrow, say less than 100 m wide then the entrance can be temporarily blocked using flotation blocks. Of course dewatering area will be larger.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12964
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Lalmohan » 26 Aug 2013 19:00

do you really want to drain the harbour?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 64013
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Singha » 26 Aug 2013 22:22

that basin houses all of the western fleet. rendering them homeless by draining such a huge area is not an option. the caisson can be built on three sides near the sub and one side is the dock itself. just that area needs to be dammed up and dried out.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17885
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby chetak » 27 Aug 2013 14:00

The ever ongoing anti India CT industry is truly alive and well............


The Sindhurakshak accident

On the eve of India’s Independence Day, against the backdrop of the proclamations of a number of naval achievements, like the reactor of its first nuclear submarine Arihant going critical, the indigenously-built aircraft carrier Vikrant commencing sea trials, Vikramaditya beginning air trials after the completion of sea trials and the acquiring of Kiev-class aircraft carrier from Russia, a serious accident marred the revelry.
At 11:53pm on the night between August 13 and 14, the orange ball of flame that lit the skyline of Mumbai harbour and soon dominated TV screens all over the world was India’s Kilo-class submarine, Sindhurakshak, which exploded after a major accident, claiming 18 precious lives comprising 15 sailors and three officers. However, the exact cause will be confirmed four weeks later, once the Indian navy’s investigation is complete. Nevertheless, a number of safety related questions linked to the horrible incident do arise.
What was the ill-fated submarine’s mission? “Mumbai Mirror” of August 15, 2013, in its story, entitled “Sub was on a secret mission”, informs: “When the blasts took place, Sindhurakshak was being armed for a clandestine operation. Presumably, its crew had no inkling of the mission yet, since military protocol requires that the commanding officer of the unit be handed over a sealed envelope a few hours prior to the departure, detailing the target and TOT (time on target).” The presence of the commandiing officers at the time of loading weapons and the night time priming of munitions, normally conducted to maintain secrecy, indeed, confirm that the submarine was to embark on a war patrol.
Reportedly, Sindhurakshak’s “crew were fitting Klub-class surface-to-air missiles with capability to hit targets within 300 km range. Apparently, gross negligence, incompetence, crew fatigue or failure to adhere to standard operating procedures (SOPs) caused two of the missiles to fire. The first missile went right through the vessel's nose and slammed into the dockyard's security wall, destroying it completely. Within seconds, another missile also caught fire and blew up inside the vessel, triggering a massive fire and knocking off a part of its roof.”
The intensity of the blasts blew the doomed submarine’s nose and sank it. Sixteen sailors, who were outside the submarine on guard duty, managed to escape by jumping into the sea after the first blast. While firefighters managed to save three more submarines, several frigates and ships anchored near Sindhurakshak.
Possible correlation with developments? A retired Pakistani navy officer, who participated in a war game in a neighbouring country, mentioned, during a talk show “Defence & Diplomacy” aired on August 25, that Indian participants had contemplated a surgical strike against Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, the Amir of Jama'at-ud-Da'wah, after playing a scenario of a hypothetical attack during a cricket match in India being attended by celebrities. The participants were adamant that the attack on Hafiz Saeed was justified using the plea of his alleged involvement in the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Looks like that the Indians have also convinced USA to announce a $10 million bounty on him.
Linking the war mission of Sindhurakshak with the deliberate heating of tension at the Line of Control by India, and the development that US shutdown its consulate in Lahore but not Karachi (where the law and order situation is much worse), because it may have had warning of a probable Indian attack on Muridke, leads me to conclude the possibility of Indian adventurism.
Lessons for Pakistan? This time fate may have intervened, but conspiracies against Pakistan will not cease and a high level of vigilance must be maintained to guard against nocturnal predators.
Horrifying implications? Chitrapu Uday Bhaskar, a retired Commodore and renowned naval strategist, maintained: “The (Sindhurakshak) accident should serve as a catalyst for India’s navy and higher defence establishment to review and introspect over the institutional inadequacies that need to be redressed.” “Inadequacies”, perhaps, comprise the technological gap emanating from leapfrogging directly to the indigenous production of nuclear-powered submarines without going through the regimen of manufacturing conventional submarines and India’s poor maintenance standards.
Finally, should the Russians withdraw the leased nuclear-powered submarines from the Indian navy? Can’t say for sure. However, there is a possibility that even they are now apprehensive of India’s ability to safely run nuclear submarines and perforce maintain a full-time deployment of a team comprising 10 Russian nuclear technicians onboard its Akula-class submarine leased to the Indian navy. If another Indian nuclear submarine were to meet a disaster, like the latest one or much worse than this, the consequences make one shudder, as the entire region would be exposed to the perils of nuclear radiation affecting all forms of life.

The writer is a former group captain of PAF, who also served as air and naval attaché at Riyadh. Currently, he is a columnist, analyst and host of programme Defence and Diplomacy on PTV.­

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19695
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Philip » 27 Aug 2013 18:00

Global sub disasters listed,but the Thresher disaster is not among them and a few other minor CW accidents.

http://www.siliconindia.com/news/genera ... cid-1.html
Deadliest Submarine Mishaps In The World

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby NRao » 27 Aug 2013 22:06

Singha wrote:that basin houses all of the western fleet. rendering them homeless by draining such a huge area is not an option. the caisson can be built on three sides near the sub and one side is the dock itself. just that area needs to be dammed up and dried out.


Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50868
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2013 23:43

DNA reports:

Navy wont call for bids to salvage the sub

Moron headline. What it says is IN will decide which proposal is the best one and award it.


Two weeks after the INS Sindhurakshak tragedy, the Indian Navy is in the process of engaging a private salvage firm to bring out the vessel’s remains from the South Breakwaters of the Naval Dockyard.

On August 13 night, the Kilo class submarine exploded :( after a fire on board. At least 18 personnel were on board when the accident occurred.

The plan is not to call for bids for the task the way it was done during INS Vindhyagiri episode. The salvage firms will submit their plan of action and the Indian Navy experts will take a call on which firm should be assigned the job under the clause of ‘emergency circumstances’.

Last week, some professional private salvage firms surveyed the vessel, including its hull.

The navy isn’t taking concrete steps to refloat INS Sindhurakshak. An officer said that given the nature of the incident and the water temperature during fire, it is highly unlikely that the equipment could be reused.

Currently, the focus of the naval divers is to extricate the bodies of all the sailors. Till now, body parts of 11 persons have been recovered.

Meanwhile, sources have informed that forensic reports are likely to be ready in this week. The report will clear the air over the identity of the bodies recovered as they were severely disfigured and not identifiable due to severe burns.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50868
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby ramana » 30 Aug 2013 01:29

Claude Arpi in Pioneer Aug 29th

....
On the subject of opacity; I want to make a prophesy: We shall never know what has happened to submarine INS Sidhurakshak. A few years ago, when Sandeep Unnithan of India Today magazine sought some information on the sinking of INS Khukri in December 1971, the Central Information Commission recommend that the Indian Navy (and the Indian Armed Forces) “build up their storehouse of information for disclosure at the appropriate time for the benefit of the students of India’s defence and to enhance the people’s trust in the armed forces’ undoubted capacity to ensure national security.” The requested files on INS Khurkri, however, remained ‘secret’ and South Block ignored the CIC’s recommendations. It is a great pity. A nation can and should learn from history.




Think about it.
INS Khukri sinking was a technological mess.

Mayurica
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 Feb 2006 14:34

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Mayurica » 30 Aug 2013 13:02

Way back in 2006, my team & I had the honour of getting on board a submarine to film the lives of submariners at sea - this was for the show 'Line of Duty' on Times Now. Hosted by Maroof Raza, the idea was to take civilians to places they hadnt gone before and offer a lay person's perspective on life along India's frontiers. In the wake of the Sindhurakshak tragedy, I thought Id go back in time and write about what it was like to be in the company of submariners – men who may not flaunt the glamour of fighter pilots and commandoes, but do nevertheless confront death every time they sail out to sea. http://mayurica.blogspot.in/
Do read and share.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12964
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Lalmohan » 30 Aug 2013 15:41

pisces III rescue

indirectly related, report on a civilian sub accident and recovery. in much deeper water, but some of the technical issues are of interest, plus background on specialised nature of the rescue capabilities and its concentration in a few firms. interesting human angle also

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby RamaY » 30 Aug 2013 16:11

ramana wrote:DNA reports:

Navy wont call for bids to salvage the sub

Moron headline. What it says is IN will decide which proposal is the best one and award it.


Rji,

A common theme across MSM. A constant urge to build a negative opinion in public about the rashtra, so perhaps the politicians can control it, in the name of voter support.

There is a need for the 2nd Bharat, the rashtra to serving and be answerable to 3rd Bharat, the public. The 1st Bharat, political leadership need to focus on long term items like in USA.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3344
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Aditya G » 30 Aug 2013 17:40

Adm Hiranandani has rued the lack of salvage capabilities of the Navy in the Official History.

Aside from the actual equipment and techniques, which may not necessarily be owned by us - IMHO it is more important to have a dedicated salvage organisation in the navy.

As the IN and CG expands, the number of accidents at sea are bound to go up. Even the expanding coastal police and customs marine wing will get into trouble. Salvage may not always be for sunken ships but for relatively lesser incidents as well.

I think we have a good Diver assets and men. These guys have shown recovery of smaller objects (Seaking, Seahawk) from the sea bed. But now quite enough.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2531
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby tsarkar » 30 Aug 2013 22:15

ramana wrote:
The requested files on INS Khurkri, however, remained ‘secret’ ...
INS Khukri sinking was a technological mess.
IMO it was a correct move by the authorities.

The sequence of events is well known by accounts from both sides. I had made a post on Page 109 of this thread summarizing it.

In battle, decisions have to be taken. In certain situation, when the odds are stacked against, one leader may order fixing bayonets & making a charge, like the Rajput cavalry charges. Another leader may order melting away into the countryside & attacking as opportunity presents, like Shivaji did in the seige of Panhala.

Capt. M N Mulla took a decision to hunt. He could've followed a Fabian Strategy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_strategy, however decided to take the offensive.

Questioning a warrior's decision & re-assessing time & again, in retrospect, will not serve any purpose.

Mayurica wrote:Way back in 2006, my team & I had the honour of getting on board a submarine to film the lives of submariners at sea - this was for the show 'Line of Duty' on Times Now. Hosted by Maroof Raza, the idea was to take civilians to places they hadnt gone before and offer a lay person's perspective on life along India's frontiers. In the wake of the Sindhurakshak tragedy, I thought Id go back in time and write about what it was like to be in the company of submariners – men who may not flaunt the glamour of fighter pilots and commandoes, but do nevertheless confront death every time they sail out to sea. http://mayurica.blogspot.in/Do read and share.
Mayurica, its a very good effort undertaken by you & your colleagues to present the toil, tears & sweat that go into defending our nation. It is evident you & your colleagues have put in a lot of hard work making these documentaries. Please accept my gratitude, and may your tribe of dedicated journalists grow.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 30 Aug 2013 23:38

Dear Mayurica,

May your tribe increase and please accept my gratitude as well. I was wondering if you might do me a huge favour. I would dearly love to get the In the line of duty DVDs/CDs. I had been in touch with Maroof Raza about them last year and he did not have them. Could you please point me in the right direction. Where can I buy them from? I would be very grateful if you could help.

Akshay

rajatmisra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: INS Sindurakshak Sinks after explosion in Mumbai Naval D

Postby rajatmisra » 31 Aug 2013 08:42

A basic question. If we do manage to raise the sub with the help of a heavy crane, what will be done next?
1. Keep it on the side of the dock to be dismantled
2. Put it on a floatation device so it can be floated away to a dry dock
3. Repair it while it is n the crane so that it can float on its own, and then tow it away

Any other option?


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests