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.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 07 May 2010 12:37

Mysterious sub visit to Beirut llegedly offloading arms.Russian,Iranian or Algerian Kilo?

hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/05/06/submarine-sneaks-into-beirut-why-that%E2%80%99s-bad/

EXcerpt:
Submarine Sneaks into Beirut? Why That’s Badposted at 7:57 pm on May 6, 2010 by J.E. Dyer
[ National Defense ] printer-friendly Retired Army Major General Paul Vallely spoke to Pajamas Media for a video posted today in which he says a Russian submarine offloaded hazardous cargo in Beirut a “couple of weeks ago.” This is something I had heard from another source last week. I imagine the ultimate source is Israeli intelligence.
According to MG Vallely, the Russian submarine flew the flag of Iran while it was in port Beirut. He indicated the sub probably came from the Baltic, but offered no other details.
My assessment: the report has a strong likelihood of being valid, but I doubt the submarine in question is a unit of the Russian Navy. It was probably a Kilo-class diesel-powered attack submarine (SS) built in Russia for export. A number of navies operate the Kilo SS. Those navies include Iran, but I discount the possibility that this was actually one of Iran’s three Kilos. An Iranian submarine could not transit the Suez Canal unreported, and could not circumnavigate Africa without refueling – an exposed and detectable event. Moreover, it is very unlikely that Iran would commit one of only three submarines to such an extended deployment, when there are a number of alternatives that would not require putting one-third of her premier anti-shipping force out of position for contingencies in the Persian Gulf.
If we factor in Vallely’s reference to the Baltic, the most likely candidate becomes an export Kilo built in the yards near St. Petersburg for Algeria. Algeria has two older Kilos from then-Soviet Russia, and in 2006 commissioned two new ones, of improved design (the Type 636 improvement on the old Type 877 Kilo).

(For an extended analysis of why the submarine in Beirut was probably the first of Algeria’s new-order Kilos, see the companion post at my website here. Be sure not to miss the video clip of the new Algerian Kilo conducting sea trials in the Baltic Sea ice.)


viveks
BRFite
Posts: 242
Joined: 17 Nov 2004 06:01

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby viveks » 07 May 2010 13:59

Craig Alpert wrote:Image


There is so much beauty in this design!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 08 May 2010 08:47

Nuclear cruisers to face upgrade

Russian competent authorities decided to rebuild decommissioned Kirov-class heavy nuclear-powered missile cruisers.

Vladimir Popovkin, Deputy Minister of Defense mentioned on air Ekho Moskvy radio in Sept 2009 about necessity of surface fleet's modernization and, in particular, about recovery programs for nuclear cruisers.

The decision on this matter has already been made: heavy nuclear-powered missile cruisers Admiral Ushakov (Northern Fleet) and Admiral Nakhimov (Pacific Fleet) will remain in operational force of Russian Navy after appropriate modernization, reported Interfax referring to a source in United Shipbuilding Corporation. At present, both ships are in Severodvinsk.

According to the source, it is planned to appropriate 500-600 mln RUR for this project in the current year. Previously, it was supposed to complete overhaul and modernization of Admiral Nakhimov at Sevmash shipyard in 2011, although it is apparent now that the terms of completion will be postponed, writes Belomorkanal. As of today, upgrade of the Northern Fleet's cruiser has not been bankrolled so far.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 08 May 2010 09:36

Russia set to keep Typhoon class nuclear subs until 2019 - Navy

16:3007/05/2010 NOVOROSSIISK, May 7 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Typhoon class strategic nuclear-powered submarines will remain in service with the Navy until 2019, the Navy commander said on Friday.

The world's largest Typhoon class submarines entered service with the Soviet Navy in the 1980s. Three of the six vessels built are still in use.

"They [the Typhoon class subs] will remain in operation until 2019. They have good modernization potential," Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky said.

The Dmitry Donskoy submarine has been modernized as a test platform for Russia's new Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile.

Two reserve vessels, the Arkhangelsk and the Severstal, are awaiting overhaul at a naval base in Severodvinsk in northern Russia. They will most likely be modernized to carry new-generation sea-based cruise missiles to match the U.S. Ohio-class submarines.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 09 May 2010 07:41


svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 09 May 2010 11:55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlnsotF4FrE

Can somebody compare with the Chinese one

The Top 10 Best Frigate in the World (世界十大最佳護衛艦)

This list is just my personal opinion!

1. Álvaro de Bazán class (Spain) = Active 4 (Planned 6)
2. De Zeven Provinciën class (Netherlands) = Active 4
3. Sachsen class (Germany) = Active 3
4. Fridtjof Nansen class (Norway) = Active 4 (Planned 5)
5. Type 054A (China) = Active 6 (Planned 8+)
6. Formidable class (Singapore) = Active 6
7. La Fayette class (France) = Active 20
8. Shivalik class (India) = Active 1 (Planned 12)
9. Type 23 (UK) = Active 16
10. Valour class (South Africa) = Active 4

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16482
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 12 May 2010 20:44

A nice article of the latest LCS Trimaran ship under test:

LCS-2 Makes Waves

Image

Image

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 15 May 2010 23:06


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16482
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 20 May 2010 03:12


Ameet
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 17 Nov 2006 02:49

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Ameet » 20 May 2010 09:01

Investigators: N. Korean torpedo sank S. Korean warship

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_ ... ship_sinks

South Korea accused North Korea on Thursday of firing a torpedo that sank a naval warship in March, killing 46 sailors in the country's worst military disaster since the Korean War.

Investigators said evidence overwhelmingly proves North Korea fired a homing torpedo that caused a massive underwater blast that tore the Cheonan into two on March 26. Fifty-eight sailors were rescued from the frigid Yellow Sea waters near the Koreas' maritime border, but 46 perished.


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Jun 2010 16:06

SoKo's corvette sinking believed to be a US led conspiracy,say many SoKos.

30% of S Koreans Believe Naval Ship Sinking a 'Conspiracy'

by Tom McGregor Tue, Jun 1, 2010, 10:24 AM
Netizens in South Korea are going wild with spreading rumors that the U.S. is responsible for the naval ship, Cheonan, sinking that occured over two months ago. The Chosun Ilbo revealed that according to a recent poll, 30% of South Koreans don't believe North Korea sunk the Cheonan.

Well, Koreans do have a knack for falling prey to conspiracy theories. Yet, they are sincere in their beliefs. While speaking to Koreans I compiled, a list of conspiracy theories in which a Korean tried to persuade me of an irrational argument and got angry when I mocked their comments. Here is my list of Top Ten Korean Conspiracy Theories:

1) George W. Bush ordered the terrorist attack of the World Trade Center, since his father was doing business with the Saudi Royal Family.

2) Japan will launch a full-scale war against South Korea to reclaim territorial rights over Takeshima/Dokdo Island.

3) American ranchers covertly exported beef products tainted with 'mad cow disease' to South Korea at the behest of the C.I.A.

4) Donald Rumsfeld started the 'Swine Flu,' because he owns shares in Tamiflu, an anti-viral drug.

5) Those afflicted by the 'Bird Flu' can be cured by eating kimchi, which is a 'magic cure' for cancer as well.

6) So-called Korean prophets predicted that a massive earthquake would strike California, so Koreans must return to their homeland.

7) Former President Roh Moo-hyun claims he hates the U.S., but he's trying to fool Koreans since he's a "puppet of American imperialism."

8) Dictator Kim Jong-il of North Korea is "glorious" for making nuclear bombs, since he hates America.

9) The U.S. should be destroyed by Osama bin-Laden, because America has the number one economy and that's not right, Korea should be number one.

10) A protestor was witnessed walking in the subway carrying a sign: "Stop Global American Capitalism." Meanwhile, she wore a baseball cap with the American flag, Ralph Lauren Polo shirt, Levi's blue jeans, Nike sneakers, holding her 'Coach' purse, and adorned with expensive jewelry and make-up.

To read the entire article from the Chosun Ilbo, link here:
http://www.dallasblog.com/2010060110066 ... iracy.html

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Jun 2010 21:19

Russia-Vietnam submarine deal worth record $3.2 bln — magazine

"The construction cost is $2.1 billion, but the building of all necessary coastal infrastructure and the delivery of armaments and other equipment may bring the total to $3.2 bln, which makes this deal the largest in the history of Russian exports of naval equipment," the Export of Arms magazine says in an editorial published in its June issue.

Admiralty Shipyards in St. Petersburg will build the submarines with the rate of one vessel per year.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 04 Jun 2010 00:48

Wobble-proof Navy crane can offload cargo at sea

Image
The U.S. Navy has completed testing on a new automated ship crane that can safely perform ship-to-ship cargo transfer while at sea and compensate for surging waves, eliminating the need for a secure deep-water port in emergency or combat situations.

The Large Vessel Interface Lift On/Lift Off (LVI Lo/Lo) Crane can also facilitate standard supply transfer to ships in choppy seas. Developed by the Sea Warfare and Weapons Department in the Office of Naval Research along with Oceaneering International, the crane has sensors and cameras as well as motion-sensing algorithms that let it automatically shift with the rolling and pitching of the sea, making it much easier for operators to center the crane over cargo and transfer it.

The ONR finished testing the crane during trials in the Gulf of Mexico. It successfully transferred 128 containers from one ship to another amid waves of up to 1 meter (3.28 feet), according to an ONR release. Normally, ships require a sheltered harbor with calm waters to prevent cargo from swinging violently.

Standard 20-foot containers, Humvees, and other heavy cargo can be quickly and safely offloaded at sea with the crane. In military operations, 10 people are needed to operate standard cranes, but the LVI crane needs only three--one in the crane house and one on each ship.

Future development and use of the crane is unclear, but a demonstration version of it is installed on the SS Flickertail State, a crane ship based in Newport News, Va. The crane is available to support U.S. humanitarian assistance and disaster-relief operations, according to ONR.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16482
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 06 Jun 2010 07:47

Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carrier


Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 09 Jun 2010 05:51

IAI/ELTA Systems Awarded $33 Million (USD) in Contracts for Airborne Maritime Surveillance Radars (MSR) Won't say who the Customer is
Israel Aerospace Industries' (IAI) ELTA Systems Ltd. (IAI/ELTA), an IAI Group and Subsidiary, has been awarded several contracts worth $33 million from foreign customers for the development and production of the EL/M-2022A Maritime Surveillance Radar (MSR) for Maritime Patrol Aircraft.

IAI/ELTA's MSRs are recognized worldwide for their contribution to operational missions, including maritime warfare operations, surveillance and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) patrol, anti-drug enforcement operations, coast guard and fishery supervision, and search and rescue operations.
ELTA's airborne radar systems are a well-known, widely used product in operational service with customers worldwide. Recently, a number of news items have been published regarding maritime patrol aircraft employing ELTA's radars to monitor the volcanic ash cloud in Iceland and the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.


ELTA Systems Ltd., a Group and wholly-owned subsidiary of IAI, is one of Israel's leading defense electronics companies and a leader in Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR), Early-Warning Command & Control, Home-Land Security, Self-Protection and Self-Defense, and Fire-Control applications on board both manned and unmanned aircraft.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 11 Jun 2010 17:46

Some very interesting Qs about the Korean corvette sinking.The Russians have expressed serious doubts too about the alleged NoKo torpedo sinking the Cheonan.

http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView ... 1&rel_no=1

This Saengnamu article is currently under review by the editorial staff.

Excerpts:
Eight Questions Needing Answers on the Investigation of the Sunken Naval Corvette Cheonan
PSPD's Cheonan Warship Report2

(pspd1994)

[Cheonan Warship Report2]
Eight Questions Needing Answers on the Investigation of the Sunken Naval Corvette Cheonan

Question 1. Had been really a torpedo-induced water column?

Question 2. No such severe injuries evident of a torpedo explosion found in the bodies of survivors and deceased soldiers

Question 3. Is it true that there is no TOD recordings from the early stage of the Cheonan incident?

Question 4. There are no severe damages evident of an explosion on the severed surface, on the bottom of the ship and in the interior of the hull.

Question 5. Why the military concealed the finding and refloating of the gas turbine room? And why did they omit the investigation of the gas turbine room from investigating?

Question 6. Were the oxidized aluminum substances, not gun powder, evident of an explosion?

Question 7. What is the profile of the YONO class submarine? Is it understandable that the submarine had not been followed for several days by the ROK and the U.S. surveillance?

Question 8. Why couldn't a torpedo launch be detected?

This document summarizes the questions raised by the Center for Peace and Disarmament of People's Solidarity for Perspiratory Democracy (PSPD) on the report released on May 20, 2010 by the joint civilian-military investigation group (JIG) under the Ministry of Defense on the cause of sinking of the naval warship Cheonan.

1. Summary of the Report by the Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group(JIG)

? The Official Results of the JIG (May 20, 2010)
: The PCC Cheonan was believed to have sunken as the ship cut in half due to a strong underwater explosion at the lower left side of the gas turbine room. The site of explosion was approximately 3m left of the gas turbine room at a depth of 6 to 9m. The weapon was confirmed to be a highly explosive CHT-02D torpedo made by North Korea with an explosion warhead of 250kg.

? Explosion Due to an Underwater Bubble Jet
● The ship severely deformed toward the top side: The hull and iron sheets were curved inward, the evidence of strong shock waves and bubble detected.
● Detection of a water column
● Partial computer simulation showed the ship cut in half under a similar situation
● Evidence of pressure and bubbles resulted from a torpedo explosion found in the entire hull of the ship
● The found non-crystalline oxidized aluminum substances believed to have come from a high temperature and high pressure explosion.

? A Torpedo Attack from a North Korean Submarine
● The torpedo parts discovered by a dredging ship at the site of the explosion on May 15 have the same schematics of a North Korean torpedo on the export brochure published by North Korea. This heavyweight HT-02D torpedo manufactured by North Korea utilizing acoustic/wake homing and passive acoustic tracking methods has 21 inches in diameter and weighs 1.7 tons with a net explosive weight of up to 250kg.
● The hangul "1번" (number 1 in English) handwritten inside of the tail end of the propeller is the same marking found in a North Korean torpedo for military exercise purposes secured by the South Korean military in 2003.
● It was confirmed that a SANGO class (300ton) submarine and a YONO class (130ton) midget submarine left a North Korean base/port in the West Sea two or three days before the attack and returned back to the port two or three days after attacking the Cheonan warship. Among these two, the YONO class was believed to have been responsible for the attack of the Cheonan vessel.
● These North Korean submarines were presumed to have infiltrated and left the South Korean waters via international seas.
● The analysis on the chemicals found adhering to both the torpedo parts and the hull revealed to be oxidized aluminum substances that resulted from a torpedo explosion.

2. Insufficient Evidence Proving a Torpedo Attack

Question 1.
Had been really a torpedo-induced water column?

● The Ministry of Defense stated in its final report that a water column coming from the bubble-jet effect was present. However, it had reported that no water column was detected. The problem is that the changed findings lack convincing power.
● The joint civilian-military investigation group (JIG) claimed that a water column caused by a torpedo was present based on the findings (1) a lookout at the coast of Baengnyeong-do Island reported to have witnessed a 20-30m wide and 100m tall water column, (2) a port-side lookout reported that he felt water drops on his face, and (3) oxidised aluminum substances to have come from a bubble jet were found on the entire hull including the bow and the stern turret.
● The findings, which the water column had left marks on the entire hull including the bow and the stern but only water-drops on the solider's face, are not convincing enough. The survivors including the port-side lookouts testified during the press conference that there was no water column and no smell of gunpowder.
● The Defense Minister when questioned by the National Assembly immediately after the release of the final results stated that the existence of a water column is not important and a simulation on water column will be completed in July.


Question 2.
No such severe injuries evident of a torpedo explosion found in the bodies of survivors and deceased soldiers

● No explosion-related injuries were found in the bodies of the surviving and dead soldiers such as burns, ruptures of internal organs such as the eardrum, and severe fractures, etc.
● No such injuries were found on the bodies of the dead soldiers found very near the site of presumed explosion. And it is not understandable that the final report had no explanation over this important matter.
● The water where the Cheonan incident had occurred is known to be one of the abundant fishing grounds, but the coast guards on the search mission reported no massive death of fish despite the explosion. Although the Ministry of Defense claimed that it was because of fast tides, the water was still at the time of the incident.


Question 3.
Is it true that there is no TOD recordings from the early stage of the Cheonan incident?

● The military had hidden the existence of the TOD (thermal observation device) that recorded the sea scenes from Baengnyeong-do Island including the process of Cheonan sinking and reported finally that no TOD recordings were present at the time when the ship severed into two. However, navy retirees reported that TOD images are recorded automatically and refuted that there would be no blind spots because several TOD devices record the same area at the same time.
● The media including the daily newspaper Hankyoreh reported the testimonies of unanimous witnesses who had seen the TOD images recorded at the time of the ship severing into half. They stated that the Cheonan warship was sailing smoothly and suddenly broke off into half, then the stern sank less than 5 minutes after breaking off and the bow floated about 20 minutes and started to sink after it had suddenly tilted toward the right. They also stated that there had not been a water column.
● National Assembly person Lee Jung-hee of Democratic Labor Party reported the similar findings at the National Assembly during the general discussion session on May 19, 2010.


Question 4.
There are no severe damages evident of an explosion on the severed surface, on the bottom of the ship and in the interior of the hull.

● More than anything else, no evidence indicative of severe damages presumed to have been caused by shock waves of a torpedo explosion has been found on the severed surface. The severed surface partially opened to the public seemed well-preserved compared to other ships damaged by torpedo attacks. Even those ammunitions and goods/articles found from the hull interior were well-organized.
● In the interim reports and the final report on May 20, the military announced that (1) an underwater explosion was highly likely based on the torn shape and (2) the ship sank as the result of a non-contact explosion since there had not been blackened soot coming from an explosion from the interior or exterior of the ship, no evidence of melting from heat and no punctured spots. However, experts refuted that these findings themselves are the specific evidence that the cause was not from a torpedo explosion.
● The Ministry of Defense stating that no punctures form after the breakage from a bubble jet is not convincing enough to explain a proximal explosion.
● Lee Jong-in, CEO of Alpha Underwater Technology Corporation specializing in ship wreckage recovery refuted the findings by the Ministry that breakage from an explosion would smash severed surface in the direction sustaining the explosive force, the severed surface would be damaged up to the point of no recognition, and no electric wires would be left being obliterated.
● He also pointed out that (1) if the torpedo explosion occurred 3m below the bottom of the ship, the ship bottom should show punctures from the explosion and the ship would be full of shattered torpedo pieces, and (2) the severed surface of the Cheonan is characteristic of physical forces rather than an explosion or proximal explosion.


Question 5.
Why the military concealed the finding and refloating of the gas turbine room? And why did they omit the investigation of the gas turbine room from investigating?

● The Ministry of Defense later confirmed the recovery of the gas turbine room, which was missed on the incident, after a civilian testified the recovery on May 18.
● The Ministry asserted that a torpedo with a net explosive power between 200 to 300 kg had exploded approximately 3m left of the bottom center of the gas turbine room. And civilian experts who had considered the possibility of aground or collision pointed out that the gas turbine room would show evidences. Thus, the gas turbine room is the critical evidence that can show the real cause of the Cheonan sinking. Nonetheless, the military tried to hide the recovery and omitted the investigation result at the time of the final report.
● According to the reports by the military, the diesel engine was recovered around mid May, and the gas turbine room was recovered on May 19 and carried to the 2nd Fleet Headquarters on May 20. In other words, investigation on the gas turbine room had not been reflected on the final report.
● Nonetheless, the military reported the final results on May 20, arguing that the findings were sufficient. Coincidentally, campaigns for local elections kicked off on that date. It is suspicious that the military investigation team and the Lee government may have reported the investigation results with undue haste with certain political goals.
● The JIG disclosed some parts of the recovered gas turbine room in pictures after May 31.


3. Lack of evidence showing the attack was from a North Korean submarine


Question 7.
What is the profile of the YONO class submarine? Is it understandable that the submarine had not been followed for several days by the ROK and the U.S. surveillance?

● The Ministry of Defense is assuming that the attack was from a YONO class submarine. The only ground for assumption is that the South Korean military failed to follow up a SANG-O class submarine and a YONO class submarine along with their mother ship from a North Korean naval base for several days.
● There is no evidence, in other words, there is no specific explanation over how the North Korean YONO class submarine attacked the Cheonan. However, the explanation is just one hypothesis after another.
● The military explained that 300ton or heavier SANG-O class submarines could not be operated at the site of the Cheonan incident because of its big size and they do not have the capability to shoot heavy torpedoes.
● That was why the military presumed that a YONO class submarine was the culprit behind the Cheonan sinking. The YONO class around 120 to 130 ton submarine is smaller than the SANG-O class, in which the existence of this smaller class was reported for the first time through the final report of the investigation. However, doubts are raised because the military is mute about whether this class is capable to launch heavy torpedoes, how long they can stay in underwater, etc.
● However, the YONO class (midget) submarine is another name for the GHARDIR class owned by Iran and it is not known whether North Korea has YONO class submarines. It is confirmed that North Korea had exported YUGO class midget submarines to Iran. YUGO class submarines and P-4 class similar to the YUGO class are not capable or have limited capability to shoot heavy torpedoes.
● The Defence Minister reported on May 22 that the government had known about the existence of the YONO class submarines since 2005. However, he stated on April 2 during the report to the National Assembly that North Korea submarines does not have much underwater navigation capabilities like latest US submarines. He also stated that two submarines were not found at one of three naval bases of North Korea. However, he estimated the possibility low since the naval base is quite far from Bangryung-do. In addition, he repeatedly denied the possibility since the submarines are of low-speed type and they do not have capability of long-lasting submerge.


Question 8.
Why couldn't a torpedo launch be detected?

● Even if the navy could not have followed North Korean submarines with sonar, it lacks convincing power that the they could not detect an approaching torpedo with sonar because it is known that an approaching torpedo is very easy to detect with sonar.
● On this issue, the military had claimed that the Cheonan's sonar system was old so that it had only 70% accuracy in detecting torpedoes in 2Km radius and only around 50% in the 30m shallow water at the scene of the incident.
● It is also doubtful over the fact that the North Korean submarine that had probably been dispatched after the sinking of the Cheonan had escaped without being detected even by the P3C patrol aircraft equipped with advanced radars.

[/quote]

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 15 Jun 2010 15:25

Russia to float out new nuclear submarine after delay

Russia on Tuesday launches a new nuclear-powered multipurpose attack submarine after a short delay caused by technical reasons, the Sevmash shipyard said.

"It is the newest generation of the Russian submarine fleet, which rightfully meets the demands of the 21st century," said Vladimir Pyalov, chief designer of the Malakhit design bureau.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev arrived in the port of Severodvinsk to attend the official float-out ceremony.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby arun » 15 Jun 2010 20:10

The Brahmos gets a mention in this article in the Economist:

Missile technology : Peril on the sea

Naval warfare: As anti-ship missile and torpedo technologies improve, a new seaborne arms race could be on the horizon

Jun 10th 2010

THE West has some formidable missiles designed to sink warships. Three of the most deadly are America’s Harpoon, France’s Exocet and the Swedish RBS-15. These all fly close to the speed of sound for up to about 200km (124 miles) using precision-guidance systems to skim over land or water. This makes them difficult to detect. And even if they are spotted, the missiles can fly in unpredictable patterns, which makes it harder to shoot them down. They then punch a warhead, weighing as much as 200kg (440lbs), into a moving ship with devastating consequences.

Despite all this, missile defences can be effective. Shooting at missiles with rapid-firing guns, or anti-missile missiles, can bring them down. The incoming missile’s electronics can also be scrambled with blasts of electromagnetic radiation, such as microwaves. And decoys can be fired to trick the missile’s homing sensors and lure it away from the vessel under attack. But missile attacks on ships are rare, so it is difficult to know just how safe a ship really is—especially if an attacker launches a dozen or so missiles at once.

One particular anti-ship missile has become especially worrying for Western defence chiefs. This is because it is even more fearsome than anything NATO countries and their allies now use. The Russian-made missile is called the Club and it can carry bigger warheads farther than any anti-ship missile the West can launch.

As is the way of NATO nomenclature, the Club has been designated another name, the Sizzler. In some configurations the Sizzler can deliver about 450kg of explosives as far as 300km. It also carries out defensive manoeuvres—even curving around islands—and some lighter versions perform a unique, nasty trick: the warhead separates a few dozen kilometres away and then accelerates from almost the speed of sound to about three times as fast. .............................

The Economist

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

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Jun 2010 20:23

I do hope Rus is working on a replacement for the Granit which is long in tooth and vulnerable at only mach1.5 - this being their primary submarine launched ASM, and needs heavier than Brahmos to target carriers.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 16 Jun 2010 04:07

New Generation Submarine for the Russian Fleet
ImageRussia is facing a very challenging task to modernize its naval forces. To achieve this, the country’s experts are working on a program for military and civil ship building. To launch a series of Severodvinsk-class submarines is one of the priorities of this program, the President Dmitry Medvedev said attending the official float-out ceremony at the port of Severodvinsk.

The Russian leader described the new multipurpose attack submarine as a good example of how a difficult project may be implemented. The new Severodvisnk submarine will help Russia modernize its navy to be ready to react to present-day threats. Russia will keep on with naval modernization despite the economic crisis, Mr. Medvedev said. "We must boost our ship building industry despite all existing difficulties, as it has been announced in our state arms program", said Mr. Medvedev.

The fourth generation Severodvinsk, the Yasen (Graney) class submarine, was built at the Sevmash shipyard. Graney class nuclear submarines are designed to launch a variety of long-range cruise missiles with nuclear warheads, and effectively engage submarines, surface warships and land-based targets. The new submarine's armament includes 24 cruise missiles, and is also equipped with eight torpedo launchers, as well as mines and anti-ship missiles such as SS-N-16 Stallion.

Experts note that the Severodvinsk submarine will be equipped with the long-range missiles. These won't be Bulava missiles which will be used at some other strategic submarines, the experts stress. The new tests of the Bulava missiles will be carried out from the nuclear submarine Dmitry Donskoy in July-September. However the Severodvinsk submarine is not a substitute for the project of the Dmitry Donskoy submarine admiral Vladimir Kamoyedov stresses.

Their purposes are different. Severodvinsk is a multi-functional submarine which is able to attack surface ships and aircraft carrier groups while the strategic task of the Dmitry Donskoy submarine is to protect and attack land objects.

According to the estimations of Western and Russian experts, the Severodvinsk submarine will be quieter and much more powerful than the USA's Sea Wolf. The Russian Navy will receive the first Severodvinsk submarine in 2011 and than six more submarines of this class are to be built.


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16482
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 17 Jun 2010 03:01


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Jun 2010 22:58

Severodvinsk to be the world's most silent sub – NF Command

In spite of being built for 17 years, nuclear-powered submarine Severodvinsk will be armed with most advanced weapons and, perhaps, will become the world most silent sub, said Capt 1 rank Alexei Poteshkin, Northern Fleet (NF) submarine force executive officer.

"State trials of the submarine will be held this year. Hopefully, upon their results Severodvinsk will be recognized the most advanced and silent – which is the main feature of submarines – ship in the world", said A. Poteshkin at Tuesday's press conference.

He pointed out that despite 17 years have passed since the sub's keel laying, arms and equipment were installed in the very recent time. "Basically, 17 years is only the hull's age, but filling is the most up-to date", Poteshkin said.

The submarine has been considerably changed, noted the officer. "The sub will be equipped only with the newest arms and hardware", underlined Poteshkin.

Answering the question of tasks for SSGN Severodvinsk, Poteshkin said it would be escorting strategic ships and performing other functions ordinary for attack subs.


SRay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 67
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SRay » 18 Jun 2010 23:28

Videos of the Phalanx CIWS failing to hit a fast boat. If this is typical performance, one has to wonder about the effectiveness of CIWS against boat swarms, cruise missiles, and the like.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 19 Jun 2010 05:48

1948 technology could help today's submariners breathe easier

Submarine crews could be breathing much healthier air thanks to miniscule devices based on 62 year-old technology. Currently, carbon dioxide is removed from the air in submarines through a reaction with chemicals such as calcium hydroxide. Chemical engineers from England’s University of Bath are collaborating with mechanical engineers from Duke University in the US, to develop a chemical-free filtration system. It utilizes seawater and tiny folded wire mesh rings known as Dixon rings.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16482
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 19 Jun 2010 07:30

SRay wrote:Videos of the Phalanx CIWS failing to hit a fast boat. If this is typical performance, one has to wonder about the effectiveness of CIWS against boat swarms, cruise missiles, and the like.


Software has a bug!!!!

Seems to be hitting all around the boat!!!

Seems to me that the Israelis are better at such things. Check out the latest DTI to read about some amazing things.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jun 2010 18:47

Image

Wide Aperture Flat Sonar Array seen on side of Yasen hull , Can see two of those flat panel from the pictures , far ahead one can see the flank array.

The sonar suite of Yasen seems to be Bow Mounted Spherical Sonar , Flank Array , Wide Aperture Array or Passive Ranging Sonar on the hull , thin line towed array sonar on the tail pod , probably the Sail may have navigational sonar suite

More pics http://pilot.strizhi.info/2010/06/20/8735


abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby abhishek_sharma » 30 Jun 2010 23:57

http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/06/30/quote_of_the_other_day_end_of_an_era

Former Pentagon policy official Jim Thomas, looking at the growing "anti-access" problem, especially in the Western Pacific, said, "We may be entering what may be called the 'post-power projection' era." He noted that this means it likely is going to be harder to deploy and operate in traditional modes. And so we may need to think about a very different force, with lower signatures, smaller footprints, less logistical support, and relying far more on alternative energies.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 05 Jul 2010 22:38

Russia set to buy Mistral with transfer of French technologies

Russia will buy French Mistral class helicopter carriers with the complete set of navigational equipment and technical documentation, but equip the ships with its own weaponry and helicopters, a defense industry source said Monday.

Russia is negotiating the purchase of at least one French-built Mistral class amphibious assault ship and plans to build two or three more vessels of the same class in partnership with the French naval shipbuilder DCNS.

"I would like to stress the point that we are buying the Mistral with all proper navigational and technological equipment, including the fire control systems," a source close to the negotiations said.

"We will use our own helicopters on the Mistral, but we will have to raise the deck for that purpose," he said.

According to other defense industry sources, the Russian Air Force plans to buy up to 100 Ka-class helicopters, including some 70 Ka-27Ms, to equip the Mistral ships.

The Mistral class ship is capable of transporting and deploying 16 helicopters, four landing barges, up to 70 armored vehicles including 13 battle tanks, and 450 personnel.

"We are also planning to use this helicopter carrier in northern latitudes, in ice floe. For that we will need to reinforce the hull of the ship, but it will not seriously change its structure or technical equipment," the source said.

The Russian military has said it plans to use Mistral ships in its Northern and Pacific fleets.

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

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Jul 2010 08:39

for people moaning about the "wavy finish" of the tiles on arihant hull, pls click first pic from the link Austin has posted.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Jul 2010 19:16

Recent findings by the British of sunken German U-boats in the waters close to British shores,indicate that many of them were not actually sunk as thought by British anti-sub patrol aircraft but were sunk due to coastal mine defences.This has surprised experts and history of the war against the U-boats has to be rewritten.The effectiveness of undersea mines is one of the most under-estimated of anti-sub weapon systems and recent reports of the IN acquiring submarine mine tech is most welcome.

This WW2 fact that many U-boats were in fact snk by mines may even help explain the loss of the SoKo corvette the Cheonan,widely thought to have been sunk by a NoKo mini-sub.In a previous post of mine,serious doubts and questions about the sinking,do not indicate that the corvette was sunk by a torpedo,which the Russians also doubt.The waters of the Korean coastline are littered with mines both from the Korean War decades ago as well as mine defences by both sides.It is not impossible that a mine broke loose from its moorings,or was in open waters by accident on the seabed and was responnsible for the corvette's sinking.

Meanwhile,Malasysia gets its second Scorpene,when will the In get its fiorst?!

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?fi ... sec=nation
Excerpt:
Royal welcome for second sub
LUMUT: The country’s second submarine, KD Tun Razak, arrived at the naval base here yesterday to a royal welcome.

On hand to greet the submarine were Sultan of Perak Sultan Azlan Shah, Sultan of Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah, Raja di-hilir of Perak Raja Jaafar Raja Muda Musa and Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

KD Tun Razak will continue its journey to its home base at the Sepanggar Bay Naval Base in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, a week from now, joining the KD Tunku Abdul Rahman.

The KD Tun Razak set sail from Toulon, France on April 30, manned by 32 officers of the Royal Malaysian Navy. It travelled 13,488km before arriving in Lumut.

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 770
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Shameek » 08 Jul 2010 22:05

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599200237800
Quoting in part.

U.S. Missiles Deployed Near China Send a Message
If China's satellites and spies were working properly, there was a flood of unsettling intelligence flowing into the Beijing headquarters of the Chinese Navy last week. A new class of U.S. super weapon had suddenly surfaced nearby. It was an Ohio-class submarine, which for decades carried only nuclear missiles targeted against the Soviet Union, and then Russia. But this one was different: for nearly three years, the U.S. Navy has been dispatching modified "boomers" to who knows where (they do travel underwater, after all). Four of the 18 ballistic-missile subs no longer carry nuclear-tipped Trident missiles. Instead, they now hold up to 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, capable of hitting anything within 1,000 miles with non-nuclear warheads.
<snip>
That's why alarm bells would have sounded in Beijing June 28 when the Tomahawk-laden 560-foot USS Ohio popped up in the Philippines' Subic Bay. More alarms likely were sounded when the USS Michigan arrived in Pusan, South Korea, the same day. And the klaxons would have maxed out as the USS Florida surfaced the same day at the joint U.S.-British naval base at Diego Garcia, a flyspeck of an island in the Indian Ocean. The Chinese military awoke to find as many as 462 additional Tomahawks deployed by the U.S. in its neighborhood.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 12 Jul 2010 18:11

Excellent article on the "Greek tragedy",its sub and military purchases and financial meltdown,ironically affecting the Germans,whose subs it was buying.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 21 Jul 2010 06:01

The UK’s GR9 Harriers to Add ‘Capability E’
Image Image Image
Capability E will involve the design, development, integration and clearance of a number of systems including software functionality for secure communications, the establishment of a second secure communications channel, a replacement video recording system, modified Auxiliary Communications Navigation Identification Panel (ACNIP), and the introduction of a Tactical Information Exchange Capability (TIEC). TIEC is the project name adopted for the introduction of a common system solution that provides Link 16 and IDM data link communications for Tornado GR4 and Harrier GR9 fleets. TIEC will not use the standard MIDS-LVT black boxes, substituting an equivalent item which is lighter, slightly smaller, and comes in a single box instead of 2 boxes.

Britain’s Harriers are in the process of receiving AN/AQS-33 Sniper ATP surveillance and targeting pods to improve their close air support capabilities, after some complaints surfaced from Afghanistan. The fleet is also involved in Brtain’s “future contracting for availability” model of fixed-price through-life maintenance support, and the capability release programme will be implemented under the Harrier Joint Upgrade and Maintenance Programme (JUMP) program at RAF Cottesmore as each incremental capability is tested and approved.


Wonder if the 7 or so remaining ones from the IN, could be upgraded to the Capability E standard?? Would be a hell of an upgrade, however if Mig 29 KUB and Naval LCA are on it's way, there is no need for the Harriers in IN to go through this upgrade

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 26 Jul 2010 13:16

The RN has mothblled its Sea gHarriers due to budget cuts prematurely.The IN can acquire extra numbers if the price is right and upgrade peices too are reasonable.These would be very useful aircraft for use by our carriers especially during amhipbious ops.

Meanwhile,the Russians are inducting new KIlo 636 subs and patrol
craft into their navy and are also planning to upgrade their inactive nuclear powered battlecruisers of the Kirov class.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100725/159939020.html

Russia will upgrade and put on active duty three mothballed Soviet-era nuclear-powered missile cruisers by 2020, a high-ranking Navy official told RIA Novosti on Saturday.

Russia built four Kirov class nuclear-powered cruisers in 1974-1998. One of them, the Pyotr Veliky, is in active service as the flagship of the Northern Fleet.

"Cruisers Admiral Nakhimov, Admiral Lazarev and Admiral Ushakov will be modernized and returned to the Russian Navy's combat force in 10 years," the official said, adding that their equipment and weapons will be fully modernized.

The Kirov class heavy cruisers are second in size only to aircraft carriers, and are similar in size to a World War I battleship.

The Admiral Ushakov (former Kirov) was commissioned in 1980 and suffered a reactor accident in 1990 while serving in the Mediterranean Sea. Repairs reportedly have never been carried out, due to lack of funds and the ensuing collapse the Soviet Union.

The Admiral Lazarev (former Frunze) was commissioned in 1984 and mothballed in 1998.

The Admiral Nakhimov (former Kalinin) was commissioned in 1988 and mothballed in 1999. The ship has been reportedly undergoing a major overhaul at the Severodvinsk Shipyard since 2005.

The Kirov class main weapons include 20 SS-N-19 Shipwreck missiles, designed to engage large surface targets, and air defense is provided by 12 SA-N-6 Grumble launchers with 96 missiles and 2 SA-N-4 Gecko with 40 missiles.



The same report also says that we are to buy two more Phalcon AWACS which use a Russian A-50 aircraft wit an Israeli radar.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 28 Jul 2010 18:02

A fleet of 4 Kirov will be a powerful punch for RuN Fleet , we might see navalised S-400 and Brahmos equipping the Cruiser.

MG-74 Countermeasures seen on Akula and other subs have been some what a mystery on how it is deployed and useful , here is a write up on MG-74 from Military Parade that explains it

MG-74 Self Propelled Multipurpose Sonar Countermeasures Device


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 29 Jul 2010 19:05


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 02 Aug 2010 11:52

Tx Austin for the Akula countermeasures info.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/01/chin ... hbors.html

Except:
China’s Navy Is Worrying Its Neighbors

Brinkmanship is making for a testy summer in East Asia. In recent years, China has been building up its naval fleet, enabling it to maintain control over trade routes. Now, its activities are provoking pushback from neighbors, and attempts to contain the rising superpower appear to be entering a new phase.

A key flash point is the South China Sea. Its resource-rich islands have drawn competing sovereignty claims from China, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam—with China acting the least cooperatively. At July’s ASEAN Summit in Hanoi, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pleased regional leaders by targeting China’s harassment of foreign ships and declaring peaceful resolution of territorial disputes an American “national interest.” But China’s Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi labeled her comments an “attack” and warned against internationalizing the issue.

The spat occurred at a sensitive time: the U.S. and South Korea had just begun joint naval exercises in the East Sea. Originally intended to show solidarity against China’s ally, North Korea, its unprecedented scale—involving some 20 warships, 200 aircraft, and 8,000 troops—angered Beijing. But the bad feelings are mutual. This year, China’s own war games have grown. Japan claims two Chinese submarines and eight destroyers passed through its waters in a brazen incursion in April.

Such belligerence “really puts a question mark in the minds of the Asia-Pacific countries about China’s claims for a peaceful rise,” says Abraham Denmark of the Center for a New American Security. The result: the region is now in the throes of a naval buildup, motivated at least partly by the need to hedge against Beijing’s power. Japan is boosting its submarine fleet for the first time in 36 years; Singapore, Indonesia, and Australia are also ramping up acquisitions. Even as Vietnam celebrates a “Year of Friendship” with China, it has bought six Kilo-class fast-attack submarines and has moved to strengthen defense ties with India, which is concerned about Chinese encroachment in the Indian Ocean.



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Balaji, Thakur_B and 46 guests