Indian Naval Discussion

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 31 Jan 2011 16:18

The latest news, from 10 mins ago. Reporting definitely that a complaint has been filed against the Nord Lake, a ship registered in Cyprus. The ship has sunk in shallow water. No one was harmed in the accident, thankfully. This could have been a disaster with terrible loss of life... luckily everyone is safe.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/wars ... dingnow&cp

Navy warship tilts precariously, 300 tonnes of fuel on board
Nitin Gokhale, Ketki Angre,
Updated: January 31, 2011 16:37 IST

Mumbai: A once majestic warship now stands - just barely - in less than seven metres of water on the floor of the naval dockyard in Mumbai.

Still, there is much to be thankful for. Nobody was on board the INS Vindhyagiri when the fire began in the immediate aftermath of the collision a little after 4 pm last evening. And the navy says the warship, worth several crores, can be repaired and eventually be brought back into service. 300 tons of fuel are on board the warship, but for now, the Mumbai Port Trust says there's no cause for concern over a potential oil spill.

Disaster has struck twice in less than 12 hours for the ship. First, it was hit on Sunday evening by a merchant ship on its way out of the Mumbai harbor. There were close to 400 people on board the Vindhyagiri - families of officers were celebrating Navy Day.

The MV Nordlake was exiting the harbor as the Vindhyagiri was trying to navigate its way in. The Nordlake steered suddenly to avoid another ship that it was communicating with. That's when it collided with the warship.

Those on board the Vindhyagiri were evacuated.

"When the collision happened, there was a hole in the boiler room and that is where the fire started. All the people were evacuated as it was close to the shore. Unfortunately the fire could not be doused, so the ship has sunk," said Qaiser Khalid, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Mumbai Port Zone.

The Director General of Shipping has ordered an inquiry into the collision. The Navy has also filed a complaint against Nordlake on the grounds that the ship from Cyprus did not follow standard operating procedure.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jan 2011 16:24

The tug was not struck, it was inspecting the structural damage I described earlier. I did see the tug inspecting damage. It was close, but not stuck, and used its bow thrusters to maintain position.

Nordlake was the green & red container ship hovering some distance off. Its specs are here -
http://www.rnkeo.com/reederei_nord/flee ... rdlake.php

From what I could find out, the fire stopped the electrical pumping required to keep the water out, and the ship capsized in its mooring. 4.5 inch gun shell production has stopped, as has the 400 mm Bofors rocket, the AK-230 were old ex-Osa boats, the 324 mm torpedoes were offloaded, & no helicopter was on board. Salvageable parts will be recovered. The fuel should have been pumped out earlier, but I believe it was providing ballast and stability, hence not pumped out earlier.

Anyways, Udaygiri was sunk in a Klub/Uran/submarine torpedo firing in 2008, and Dunagiri et al were soon to follow suit, so its not a major loss.

Foreign ships are often not aware of the strength of local tides, and hence such incidents happen. Maybe a pilot vessel would have helped.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 31 Jan 2011 16:32

^^

Above explanation seems more likely. Still, a sad and frightening end to a happy day for those on board.

negi · Post by **negi** » 31 Jan 2011 16:42

How far away from the jetty did she shink ?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jan 2011 16:46

My references to halting traffic while a major exercise/event I am sure will now probably be re-examined in the light of the disaster.WHen Trafalgar 200 took place at Portsmouth in the UK,commemorating the 200th anniversary of the famous battle,there was no movement of merchantmen during the event.However,as explained to us over the speakers,being a "working port",there was an interval during which large ferries from Spain,France,etc., were allowed to enter port.After that interval which was about an hour+,the event was continued into the evening undisturbed,with a fantastic fireworks display,simulating the battle and great storm that raged after the battle adding to the destruction of ships.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jan 2011 16:52

She sank inside the anchorage (where the Survey Ships are usually berthed). Useful parts (if any, I doubt) will be recovered and the rest of the ship scrapped.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jan 2011 16:53

Reports say that the merchant vessel struck the frigate amidships with its bows causing a "large hole" amidships.Sme say port,others starboard.If the ship was entering harbour and the merchantman leaving port,then it would be on the starboard beam.From the pics of it,the vessel dwarfs the frigate and it is probable that it has a large protruding bulge at the keel,where a bow sonar would normally be located in a warship.Take a look at our new fleet tankers from Italy which have such bulges.This would've been responsible for the damage caused ,especially below the waterline,if the engine and boiler room was affected.One TV report said that the ammo was offloaded during the evening /night (thankfully).Perhaps a short circuit during the morning when repairs were being carried out (attempts must've been made to temporarily seal the hole caused and limit/stop flooding) set alight some of the fuel and the fire spread rapidly,and attempts to put out the fire added to the list and the eventual capsising/sinking.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 31 Jan 2011 16:53

This is a huge loss. It really baffles me how something like this could happen. hight time Navy get's a seperate harbour to operate from. I think even in Cochin this needs to be done.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jan 2011 17:00

The reports that the merchantman suddenly veered to avoid a collision with another MV seems to be the cause of the accident.Tragic-for the Vindhyagiri.One must only be thankful for small mercies that no loss of life was involved,that the frigate was 30 years old and would be decommissioned within the year.Imagine the catastrophe had it been the Viraat...!

Kapil · Post by **Kapil** » 31 Jan 2011 17:06

I dont know what to say.
I feel terrible.
I heard about the incident when a delay was announced in disembarking visitors from Viraat.

Later,I passed by Vindhyagiri and saw her with tugs.She was listing a bit and damage seemed to be on the starboard side as nothing was visible on the port side.
Pics here:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/Misc/Vindhyagiri/

Lots of divers were being readied at the jetty along with underwater lights,cutting torches.Command Clearance Diving Team was the first to respond.Dockyard officers were nervously pacing at the jetty just after a vermilion sun went down. I havent seen so much dockyard brass even at a ship launch. INS Deepak was berthed alongside and her firefighters were running down the gangway and putting on their gear.It was a methodical response to an emergency everyone had trained for but nobody would ever wish to see specially on a day like this when the flotilla and the fleet took their families out to show them what life at Sea is about.

The atmosphere soaked you in; a fleet ship was coming in badly hit and everyone wanted to put in their maximum to save her.

I have fond memories of this ship; she has been commanded by some of the Navy's best over the years.
She just competed a major refit recently and had even rescued some lost seamen while on a trial sortie.

What a loss. She was also our lead UAV linked ship.

I cant write anymore right now.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 Jan 2011 17:50

Was it fit with radars and sensor equipments to avoid such collisions? Ships must be easily detectable and trackable.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jan 2011 17:54

Well, there was a pilot!

M V Nordlake started off from JNPT at 1.54 pm on Sunday with a JNPT pilot to escort it out of the channel. N N Kumar, JNPT deputy chairman, said, "Our pilot was constantly in touch with the vessel tracking monitoring system on the wireless. The collision happened near the Sunk Rock Lighthouse at around 3.30 pm."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 395672.cms

^^ There was no visible damage on the hull - either port or starboard - like the Titanic or the USS Cole. My ship passed from the starboard. There was a crack in the hull under the waterline, and the pumps were able to cope with the leak until the fire put the electrical system out next morning, and it listed and capsized.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 31 Jan 2011 18:25

^ Can't there be emergency power routed to keep the pump working from land or from nearby ship?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jan 2011 18:42

^^ Possible, and there are submerged pumps in service as well. However, routing electrical power, and submerged pumps to where it is actually needed might be difficult in an emergency situation. Lets wait for complete details to emerge. For example, in fire-fighting, getting the hose to heart of the fire is the difficult part. One may spray tons of water outside without making a difference.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 31 Jan 2011 19:07

^ Thanks. Put that Q to increase the understanding. Glad there is no casualties.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 31 Jan 2011 20:05

Maybe I am talking loud, but is there any sabotage angle in this unfortunate incident?

VikB · Post by **VikB** » 31 Jan 2011 20:18

tsarkar - thank you for the explaination. It perfectly explains what I saw. Honestly I have been troubled by the sight what I got thinking that I was seeing the culprit ship.
If it was the rear of the ship where it got struck then it was the starboard side else the other way.

Though it was an old ship yet this is not the honourable way to make an exit. I wonder what must be going on in the hearts of the Navy personal of that ship. Imagine the situation that the pride with which they must have got their folks to come and see the place they work with honour - and suddenly their 'home'/workplace is no more.

The fire being caused by efforts to block the damaged part is still baffling. Whatever efforts but there should not have been a fire as it did not happen at the time of collision.

One thing I want to comment- our Navy is just like us. A bunch of Indians trying to maintain a hugely complex system/equipment/procedure inspite of great odds by putting in their sweat and blood. It does not have the backing of a well oiled and fed system of the west. Seeing the Harrier take off within 400 ft was awesome. Being a part of the top nation group is something. Armed forces and space are the only two places that brings us anywhere close to the western 'big brothers'. whatever little respect we have amongst them is because of these two arms else we are the usual almost-third-world.

Sorry for going OT

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 31 Jan 2011 20:20

ASPuar wrote:So far, there is no proof of this. So its a rather big assumption to make. We should wait for a proper report.

On the contrary, it seems from news reports, that a sudden and unexpected maneouver on the part of the merchant ship led to the collision.

The Navy loses a warship navigating its port and all you can find fault is with my post?

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 31 Jan 2011 20:38

^^

What do you want me to say? Im just pointing out that it is premature to start allocating blame, without knowing the full facts of the case. And when you make (wild) accusations like "the navy has done nothing" etc etc, Im afraid you go completely off the mark. Not one assertion in your post was based on any fact. Just speculation. Sorry, but It is a post well worth being panned.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 31 Jan 2011 20:45

My friend there is a warship sunk in the Navy's home port, in peace time. Please look at it dispassionately and you may see my point. My point could have been "wild" if there was a minor incident. And if you want me to list previous incidents, please let me know. I did not list them earlier because it is distasteful.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 31 Jan 2011 20:50

Vivek K, do you ever make a post which is NOT critical of some branch of Indian armed forces or other? On manufactured pretexts if necessary.

While sinking of a IN ship is painful to all, clearly we see the pain in Kapil's and other posts without being pointlessly carping.

Your post is factually incorrect and extremely distasteful.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 31 Jan 2011 20:53

Vivek K wrote:My friend there is a warship sunk in the Navy's home port, in peace time. Please look at it dispassionately and you may see my point. My point could have been "wild" if there was a minor incident. And if you want me to list previous incidents, please let me know. I did not list them earlier because it is distasteful.

So what would you like everyone to do? Leap to the same (not necessarily correct conclusions) which you have arrived at? May I remind you of your first hyperbolic post? "How will the navy avoid the enemy if it cannot avoid merchant ships" (I am paraphrasing). You want me to agree with this nonsensical statement? Fine, to keep you happy, I will, even though there is not a shred of evidence at present, that it was the Navy vessels fault.

Now let us stop this.

A fine ship is lost. Careers are ruined. And all at the end of a happy day. So if you really dont want to continue being distasteful (yes, despite your considerate mien, you have already been distasteful), please, end this matter here, and understand that some people are just feeling (appropriately) sad on this sad day, and do not want to hear further unsubstantiated and illogical braying.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 Jan 2011 21:00

>>And if you want me to list previous incidents, please let me know. I did not list them earlier because it is >>distasteful.

does the fact that all those events happened in mumbai convey anything to you or do I have to spell it out ? in this case all indications so far point to a chain of events where there was little (or nothing) CO of INS Vindhyagiri could do to prevent this incident. in earlier events the CO's were in effect dismissed from service.
and all you can do at this time is continue to harp on something that you either don;t understand or chose not to.

whichever it is, BR is not going to tolerate senseless and ignorant bashing of the forces, kindly stop.
this is NOT a request.

@ others, please discontinue this line of discussion with Vivek K'ji.

sum · Post by **sum** » 31 Jan 2011 21:03

Scary to imagine if it was the Shivalik or the Delhi class instead of the mighty ol' Vindhya!!!

Dont care if it was a old ship or not but is a real disaster for the IN.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jan 2011 21:08

tsarkar wrote: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 395672.cms

Could someone explain this news item to me?

The India Navy warship INS Vindhyagiri capsized on Monday.

According to Navy spokesperson the warship is sitting on the seabed.

The damaged INS Vindhyagiri, which has reportedly suffered a crack in its hull, was brought to the naval dockyard.

Vindhyagiri is in the naval dockyard and will be examined thorougly on Monday, said a naval official.

Ahh - from Indian express - the explanation
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/ins-v ... st/744130/

Defence spokesman Manohar Nambiar said the ship was resting on the sea bed and it cannot sink as there was not enough water.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Jan 2011 21:12

Looks like it was a genuine system accident.

It was the unexpected tide and the two merchant ships in the harbor at the time of the accident.

Instead of falgellating we should concentrate on what worked. And what measures would be necessary next time.

If there was no tide then the two merchant ships were not an issue.

Some sort of movement control during naval ship movements is needed in the harbor especially at high tide

I hope they (IN board of inquiry) see the complete picture and not jeopardize the wrong careers.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 31 Jan 2011 21:16

@ Sid

What you are talking loud would have also occurred to the Naval Brass.

It is no secret that the mumbai underworld, some of whom are now based in our friendly neighboring country, has long ago infiltrated the docks. Some even own small private shipping companies with Tugs, cargo ships, launches et all.

I have faith in our Naval Brass to make a thorough investigation into all aspects of this incident.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jan 2011 21:19

Vivek K wrote: What is wrong with the navy? If naval vessels cannot avoid merchant ships, how do they expect to avoid the enemy?

Saar the Indian navy does not avoid the enemy.

Why would you want them to avoid the enemy. they should avoid friends.

Vivek K wrote:My friend there is a warship sunk in the Navy's home port, in peace time. Please look at it dispassionately and you may see my point. My point could have been "wild" if there was a minor incident. And if you want me to list previous incidents, please let me know. I did not list them earlier because it is distasteful.

Saar I see your point loud and clear. A ship has sunk in a collision. Ships must not sink in peacetime collisions. But it has happened. Not for the first time.

You have asked - how will the navy avoid the enemy. The Vindhaygiri is certainly going to avoid the enemy no?

But when we come to the issue of "facing the enemy", I am certain a man of your intellect can figure out the obvious by resorting to the simple expedient of applying your thinking mind faster than your typing finger. The Vindhyagiri is not going to face the enemy, having been sunk in port. The navy will be forced to face the enemy using other ships. Hopefully those other ships will also not sink in port due to collisions with neutrals and avoid the enemy as you desire.

If all Indian naval ships are sunk in port they are not going to be able to face the enemy are they? They will all "avoid the enemy" in a dream sequence for you. That was not too difficult an answer was it? You could have arrived at the answer yourself rather than pissing off morons of lesser intellect.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 31 Jan 2011 22:32

Great! Now that Dr. Shiv has answered, we can all go back to sleep. All of us of persons of lesser intellect and knowledge should not raise uncomfortable questions. Roger! Out!

Avik · Post by **Avik** » 31 Jan 2011 22:34

Perhaps its a little too early to delve into an autopsy, but is the hull damage a pointer to structural weakness brought about by corrosion? Is the quality of steel used in construction susceptible to higher rates of corrosion or is the quality of build questionable? I have these queries simply because the amount of damage suffered by a sub 30 year ship is enormous. I think we've been very lucky that all this happenned within shouting distance of the anchorage, especially with kids and families on board. It does seem rather evident that the V-Giri would have suffered even more catastrophic damage in case of a mine/torpedo attack in case of hostilities.

Leaving apart measures to decongest the Mumbai basin, are there other risks related to quality of steel and build that may make older vessels more susceptible?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 Jan 2011 22:39

wiki wrote:Name: INS Vindhyagiri
Commissioned: 8 July 1981
General characteristics
Class and type: Nilgiri class frigate
Displacement: 2682 tons (standard)
2962 tons (full load)
Length: 113 m
Beam: 13 m
Draught: 4.3 m
Propulsion: 2 x 550 psi boilers
2 x 30,000 hp motors
Speed: 28 knots
Range: 4000 miles @ 12 knots
Complement: 267 (incl 17 officers)[1]
Sensors and
processing systems: Signaal DA05 / BEL PFN513 radar
Signaal LW08 / BEL RAWL02 surface radar
Signaal ZW06 / BEL RASHMI navigation radar
Signaal M-45 navigation radar
Westinghouse SQS-505 / Graesby 750 sonar
Type 170 active attack sonar
Armament: 2 x MK.6 Vickers 115mm guns
4 x AK-230 30mm guns
2 x Oerlikon 20mm guns
2 x triple ILAS 3 324 mm torpedo tubes with Whitehead A244S or the Indian NST-58 torpedoes
Aircraft carried: 1 Westland Sea King or HAL Chetak

all these features did not help any bit?

PS: please note there was an interdiction by IN a little while back on the pirates. Now raising your eyebrows a little bit., till we know the actual incident details..

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 31 Jan 2011 22:47

^^^
Why would any of the radars (or sonars!!) help in this? This is a narrow entrance to the Mumbai harbour. One of the busiest passageways where ships pass within a fairly close distance of each other all the time. What has happened, time will tell. But it is basically an ATC kind of issue, where ships got too close to each other. Radars are not required. Everybody knows that they are around. This is essentially wrong maneuvering (potentially to avoid other ships) or drifting due to the tides. What does Radar have to do with it?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 Jan 2011 22:51

^^ as a situational aware system, and protecting your valuable assets? I don't understand : "radars are not required " could you please explain why would they switch off, and be floating like .. ok.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 31 Jan 2011 22:55

^^^^
Because they are WVR in broad daylight. They were always going to be very close to each other, thats not a surprise. There was some drift/ changes in direction last minute which probably caused this accident. And no amount of powerful radar will prevent that. Its human error, from whom, we don't know.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jan 2011 23:35

Most ports worldwide are shared between naval and civilian ships, as are airports. One can quote numerous examples, that I will avoid for the sake of brevity.

Mumbai Port Trust is a very efficient port control organization, and has pilots boats, and experienced pilots. There was a pilot deployed on MV Nordlake. Tide tables are published much in advance; however the strength of the tide has to be discovered by the navigator and the helm, and this is where seamanship comes in.

Every harbor has incoming and outgoing channels, like two way roads. However, the effect of the tides are such that, if not adjusted for, it will yaw & drift your car (ship) and push it to the opposite lane, directly facing incoming traffic. As anyone who has driven in bumper-to-bumper traffic is aware, despite swerving or braking, this will inevitably result in collision with someone or the other.

As I quoted in my last post, there is a vessel tracking monitoring system in place. It did not help you since you reported your position to the VTMS in the correct lane without adjusting for the yaw induced drift, and the VTMS system depends on your inputs, and believes you are in the right lane when actually you are in the wrong lane. Like KAL007 over Soviet Union.

It was a twist of incredibly bad luck that between 1500-1800 hours, the tide suddenly grew in strength. The tide tables indicate height and time, but not strength. Most seamen and ships were able to hold their course, hence we did not see a pileup (on the seafloor), yet despite best precautions, accidents do happen.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Feb 2011 00:00

So, which is better..switching off the radar in WVR and cause an accident or switch on the radar in WVR and avoid an accident? to err is human, agreed, to err in process is not correct or to setup incorrect process is bad.

besides, higher security since 2611 scenario. I am not dhoti shivering, but pointing possible prevention aspects. I would like to learn.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 01 Feb 2011 00:04

SaiK wrote:So, which is better..switching off the radar in WVR and cause an accident or switch on the radar in WVR and avoid an accident?

besides, higher security since 2611 scenario. I am not dhoti shivering, but pointing possible prevention aspects.

Er, how will radar offer extra assistance when you can see look out and see the other ship? And like tsarkar mentioned, when there is a sudden drift due to high strength of the tides, how will the radar predict that?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Feb 2011 00:21

okay, thanks. I re -read, the confusion remains. The low tide only made the keel touch the seabed. That means which ever ship touched is not actually moving (correct?). which also points the other ship responsible for collision (assuming the merchant ship keel was not touching ground).

If keels are touching, so would be the movement and lesser damage due to collision that would have caused without keels touching the ground. somethings are not clear.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 01 Feb 2011 00:51

^^^
I think you have confused the timeline here a little bit. The hitting the sea bed occurred after Vindhyagiri was taken to the berth after the accident. Hitting the sea bed had nothing to do with the accident and was a result of it, rather than a cause.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 01:01

SaiK, Here the high tide caused waves which were more than expected for the separation distance between the big ship and the smaller naval ship. The big ship swerved to avoid another and bumped the naval ship.