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.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21044
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 11 Jul 2015 00:05

France and Russia reached a deal over the cancelled $1.3 billion Mistral warship agreement

http://www.ibtimes.com/france-russia-mi ... z3fWCGrQQd

Russia and France have reached a tentative agreement on compensation payable to Moscow as a result of Paris' decision to cancel the delivery of two Mistral helicopter carriers.The cancellation of the Mistral deal reportedly will cost France about $1.3 billion. The agreement still must be signed by both Russian President Vladimir Putin and French President Francois Hollande, according to media reports.France canceled the delivery of the two Mistral ships in November 2014. Hollande cited Russia's alleged involvement in the continuing crisis in Ukraine, saying the deal could not go through as there had been little progress concerning a ceasefire. Russia annexed Crimea in February 2014, and it purportedly has provided military support to pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine since them.France may be able to sell the ships to the U.S. or another NATO ally, although no buyer yet has been identified. Maintenance of the ships could be costing French taxpayers millions of euros a month, leading some to suggest that the cheapest option would be to sink them.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3763
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Shreeman » 11 Jul 2015 04:13

^^^ The rear half of each ship was built by russia in russia! Froggistan isnt doing just LCA style sanctions, the $1.xB will come out of russian money via the Yukos nonsense.

For those suggesting a kabadiwala approach to defense procurement of these, I have a recommendation: Why not start a new thread just for recommending what old, discarded, unmaintained, unoperated, down-selected, demoware, and other such "western" gems that can be procured on the cheap? Because India needs them to invade vietnam tomorrow.

Seriously, a "Kabadiwala approach to defense procurement" could capture all used polish tin cans, rejected "jets" like scorpions, the M-2000 like the baki approach to buying M3 and M5s and these tin cans too (half made in russia == tin can). Posts recommending buying hardware pooped and retired by TFTA (a la Trenton) could be cited there as tactical brilliance. In one place, the glory of recommendation will all of gujrat polished gems to shame.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 11 Jul 2015 15:28

Photos from IMDS 2015 ( 40 pics )

http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/64805/

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 12 Jul 2015 07:34

Model of a Russian carrier:

https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default ... -model.jpg

A design for a large, nuclear-powered aircraft carrier was unveiled at the seventh maritime and defense show (IMDS’2015) held last week in St. Petersburg, Russia. The Krylov State Research Center—a government-owned scientific institute specializing in marine technologies—showed a scale model of a “multipurpose aircraft carrier” that was comparable in size to the U.S. Navy Nimitz class. The Russian ministry of defense is funding Krylov’s work under Project Shtorm (Storm).

The carrier measures 95,000 to 100,000 metric tons by displacement, with a length of 330 meters (1,082 feet) and a width of 40 meters (131 feet). It has a “twin island” layout similar to that found on the new British Queen Elizabeth-class carriers. In addition to the big ski jump in the bow, characteristic of previous Russian carriers, the Shtorm comes with a second, smaller, one at the end of the angled deck. According to Krylov’s leaflet, the carrier is outfitted with two catapults. The scale model showed four. Other visible characteristics include four arrestor wires, four aircraft elevators, two cranes and several multi-tube rocket launchers.

The carrier would have a crew of 4,000 to 5,000, and an air wing of 80 to 90 aircraft. The scale model included combat aircraft on the flight deck that were reminiscent of a navalized version of the Sukhoi T-50 PAKFA fifth generation fighter with folding wings and empennage; AWACS aircraft that resembled a single-tailed American E-2C Hawkeye; and Kamov Ka-27 series helicopters.

Vice admiral (ret.) Vladimir Pepelyaev, head of R&D ship design and programs division at the Krylov’s center, told AIN that “we determined the ability of the industry to build such a ship…the associated risks and costs…as well as development potential of such a project.” Pepelyaev described the model exhibited at IMDS’2015 as “an export version…a derivative of the main one developed for the Russian navy.” He said that a key design target for the carrier was the ability to launch multiple aircraft—a mix of air defense fighters and heavily loaded strike aircraft—using several catapults and ski jumps. Russian industry has built and trialled an experimental electro-magnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), but the Russian Navy has not yet confirmed whether it is an option for the new carrier.

Local media outlets estimated the construction cost of such a ship at 160 billion Roubles (nearly $3 billion), not including the air wing. The high cost of aircraft carriers has previously discouraged the Russian navy, whose only operational carrier—the Admiral Kuznetsov—was commissioned in 1990. The Shtorm is roughly 1.5 times larger the Kuznetsov, and twice the size of the INS Vikramaditya that Russia delivered to India in November 2013.

In Pepelyaev’s view, Russia and India can cooperate in executing their national carrier programs. Perhaps the main idea behind the Shtorm design is not so much about the Russian navy but about keeping India’s and China’s interest in military-technical cooperation. Both countries have ambitions to develop powerful blue-water fleets. But they lack experience, technologies and knowledge, which the Kremlin is eager to sell to its largest international customers for weapons.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 12 Jul 2015 07:43

* Two ski jumps? One of them along the landing area? Strange.

* Also cost:

(nearly $3 billion)



Remind me, how much did the Vicky cost India?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36299
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 12 Jul 2015 18:00

must be nuke powered

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 13 Jul 2015 13:29

Conversion for Oscar 2 to special purpose sub

Second birth Belgorod

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 13 Jul 2015 18:14

Thais p*ssing off the US.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /29904545/
Thai Chinese Sub Buy Challenges US Pivot
By Wendell Minnick 10:24 a.m. EDT July 12, 2015

TAIPEI — Thailand's move to purchase Chinese submarines has exacerbated tensions with the US and poses a challenge to Washington's "pivot" to the Pacific.

The military junta, which declared a coup in May 2014 and created the National Council for Peace and Order, could turn to China for political and military support and cooperation, analysts said. The junta-led Cabinet approved the purchase of three Type 039A (Yuan) attack submarines in early July.

After the coup, the US reduced its presence at the annual Cobra Gold military exercises held with Thailand, and postponed further discussion on planning 2016 exercises.

There are fears in the region that US sanctions are pushing Thailand into China's political sphere, said Martin Sebastian, head of the Centre for Maritime Security and Diplomacy, Maritime Institute of Malaysia.

"The US is giving the junta the cold shoulder, apparent during the Cobra Gold Exercise," he said.

The sub decision will worsen the drift in Thai-US relations and frustrate the US' rebalance strategy, said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

"It is building into a kind of brinkmanship from Bangkok which will require the US to weigh its values and interests carefully," he said

US criticism might be the prime driver for the turn toward China, Pongsudhirak said.

"Evidently, Thailand's military government has found superpower support in Beijing, as China has embraced Thai generals in both coups in 2006 and 2014," he said. "Having China on its side is hugely important to the Thai military because it confers 'face' and international legitimacy while Western countries generally shunned and downgraded dealings with Thailand."

The new constitution drafted by the junta will no doubt cause more problems with the US, Sebastian said. Critics and activists are warning that the constitution includes anti-democratic provisions designed to prevent any group loyal to Thaksin Shinawatra, who served as prime minister from 2001 until the 2006 military coup, from returning to power.

"The current completed draft reportedly confirms these fears. Unelected individuals can become prime minister with parliamentary support, while most lawmakers would be appointed rather than elected. And parliament will also be elected via proportional representation, a system that would dilute the power of any large party and favor small parties and coalitions," he said. Such a system likely would draw the ire of the US, he said.

During the Cold War, the US and Thailand maintained a robust military exchange that evolved into the Cobra Gold exercises in 1982. Since the 1980s, the Thai Navy's procurement of ships ranged from across the globe, including China, Italy, Singapore, Scotland, Spain and the US. During the 1990s, China sold two Chinese Type-25T frigates and four Jianghu III-class guided missile frigates to Thailand, but both have been plagued with technical problems, including integration issues with third-party technologies.

Thailand procured a Spanish aircraft carrier in the 1990s but had difficulty with maintenance. Its nine AV-8 Harrier jump jet fighters are now inoperative and the carrier spends most of its time in dock, though occasionally it participates in regional disaster relief missions with a handful of helicopters, including a few Sikorsky Knighthawks and Seahawks.

The submarine selection surprised even Thai defense and security analysts in Thailand, Pongsudhirak said.

"Edging closer to China is understandable, even necessary, but buying submarines from the Chinese is something else much more alarming when other bidders such as Germany or Sweden seemed to make more sense."


The military junta has been unwilling to explain to the public why Thailand needs submarines and why they are being purchased from China, he said.

The submarine decision has taken the "geopolitical game into a new alarming level" for Bangkok, Pongsudhirak said. Purchasing submarines is a large and long-term commitment.

"It puts Thailand's eggs in the Chinese basket — perhaps too many eggs — not to mention logistical and practical issues such as interoperability," he said.

The selection of Chinese submarines and increased military exchanges with China demonstrates that Thailand will not be subject to further political bullying from the West.

Tim Huxley, executive director of the International Institute of Strategic Studies-Asia, Singapore, said the Thais are trying to show the US that its policy of punishing Thailand for last year's military coup and the continuing military dominance of the country's politics is not cost-free. He said it comes at a time when the US is trying to bolster its alliances and security partnerships in the region amid rising inter-state competition, while Thailand is demonstrating that it can improve its relations with China if it wants to.

From the Thai perspective, China is an increasingly important economic partner and there are no direct security-related conflicts between Bangkok and Beijing. Thailand, though, does place some value on Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) cohesion and does object to China's behavior in the South China Sea and its impact on ASEAN partners, Huxley said.

"On its part, China sees Thailand as an important friend in Southeast Asia. However, the bilateral Sino-Thai relationship has developed gradually over several decades, and what we are seeing now is an uptick in a long-term trend rather than a dramatically new development," he said.

In the medium- to long-term, Huxley said, continued US emphasis on democracy in Thailand could push Bangkok even closer to Beijing in strategic terms. As for the submarine purchase, there are those who doubt that it will proceed, he said, as the Thai armed forces' reluctance to acquire Chinese equipment is well known — reflecting earlier disappointments — and that they have a general preference for US and other Western equipment.

The prospective submarine purchase may just be a tactic to worry the US and the West generally, he said.

"Buying Chinese submarines will exacerbate the drift in Thai-US relations and frustrate the US' rebalance strategy," Pongsudhirak said. Even prior to the 2006 coup, and between the 2006 and 2014 coups, when civilian governments were in charge, Thailand was gravitating more into China's strategic orbit in mainland Southeast Asia, he said.

"So the trend of moving closer to Beijing has been there for some time, reflecting new and emerging geopolitical realities of mainland and maritime Southeast Asia," Pongsudhirak said. "China has more influence in its backyard mainland but has faced more criticism and tension with the likes of the Philippines in the maritime domain, where the United States remains pre-eminent."


Thailand's Chinese subs could operate in the Andaman Sea manned by PLAN 'advisers" in a crisis with India. It is a clver move by the PLAN to establish a logistic base in the IOR adjacent to the A&N islands ,from where they can also operate their subs,just as they plan to goat Gwadar. Have the IN/MOD's watchdogs taken note of this?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 15 Jul 2015 10:27

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150713/1024554961.html
Russia's Five Most Lethal Submarines as Seen by US Magazine

Military & Intelligence
15:53 13.07.2015
Having recently published lists of Russia's deadly naval ships and dangerous military aircraft, the National Interest is back with a new best of compilation.

Having recently published lists of Russia's deadly naval ships and dangerous military aircraft, the National Interest is back with a new best of compilation.

Russia makes every effort to improve its nascent submarine fleet by upgrading Soviet-era models and offering brand new platforms, like Borei and Yasen. Let's take a closer look.

A file picture taken in Brest harbor, western France, on September 21, 2004, shows the Vepr Russian nuclear submarine of the Project 971 Shchuka-B type, or Akula-class (Shark) by NATO classification , the same type as the Nerpa Russian nuclear submarine

A file picture taken in Brest harbor, western France, on September 21, 2004, shows the Vepr Russian nuclear submarine of the Project 971 Shchuka-B type, or Akula-class (Shark) by NATO classification , the same type as the Nerpa Russian nuclear submarine

Akula-class submarine

Project 971 Shchuka-B or Bars, designated by NATO as the Akula, is a nuclear-powered attack submarine equipped with 40 torpedoes, mines and 12 RK-55 Granat cruise missiles.

Russia’s 5 Most Deadly Naval Weapons as Seen by US Media
First deployed in late 1980s, it can move at an impressive speed of up to 35 knots when submerged, has a maximum operational depth of 600 meters (nearly 2,000 feet) and boasts an endurance of 100 days.

But the Akula's truly remarkable feature is its low level of noise generation the Soviet and later Russian engineers were able to achieve. An upgraded version, known as the Akula II, was the quietest submarine at the time when it was commissioned, exceeding the upgraded version of the US Los Angeles-class subs.

The Akula remains one of the quietest Russian submarines to date.
The Russian Navy operates over ten Akulas, with one Project 971 submarine, currently known as INS Chakra, being on a ten-year lease in India.

Kilo-class submarine
Project 877 Paltus Kilo-class Submarine
© Sputnik

Known in Russia as the Project 877 Paltus, the Kilo is what the National Interest referred to as a Cold War classic. It is a diesel-electric powered attack submarine first commissioned in 1982.

The Kilo is fitted with surface-to-air missiles, torpedoes, mines and anti-ship missiles. The class was designed to carry out anti-shipping and anti-submarine missions in littoral waters.

The model proved to be a popular export platform and was purchased by Algeria, China, India, Iran, Poland and Romania.

A diesel-powered Varshavyanka-class submarine during the celebrations of the Russian Navy Day in Vladivostok
© Sputnik/ Vitaliy Ankov

Project 636M

Project 636.3 Varshavyanka is an improved Kilo submarine, boasting higher speed, more advanced stealth technology and extended combat range than its predecessor. The sub was dubbed by NATO a 'black hole' since the improved Kilo is nearly impossible to detect underwater.

"A silent killer, the upgraded model is already viewed as one of the quietest diesel-electric submarine models in service," the magazine observed, referring to the Varshavyanka. It is armed with torpedoes, mines and Kalibr 3M54 (NATO SS-N-27 Sizzler) cruise missiles.

The first three Project 636M subs of the six ordered by Russia's Ministry of Defense entered service in 2014 and were assigned to Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

The fourth Project 636M sub, dubbed Krasnodar, was launched in late April. The last two submarines, the Veliky Novgorod and the Kolpino, are slated to join the Black Sea Fleet by 2016.

Borey class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Yuri Dolgoruky
© Photo: Sevmash

Borei-class submarine

The Borei- and Yasen-class submarines are the two platforms designed since the end of the Cold War. The former is a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine designed to replace Russia's aging Typhoon-class, Delta III and Delta IV subs and intended to serve as the backbone of Russia's maritime nuclear deterrence.

Yury Dolgoruky Strategic Nuclear Submarine
© Sputnik

The fourth-generation Project 955 submarines are equipped with 16 RSM-56 Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missiles with a range of 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles). Each Bulava SLBM is fitted with up to ten thermonuclear warheads.

The Borei-class subs "promise to provide the Russian Navy with a potent long-range capability for years to come," the National Interest noted.

The Russian Navy operates three Borei-class submarines, the flag ship Yury Dolgoruky, Alexandr Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh. The first two were commissioned in 2013, while the latest one is in active service since December 2014.

The first submarine of the Project 955-A Borei-II class, dubbed Knyaz Vladimir, is expected to enter service in 2017. By 2020, the Russian Navy plans to operate a total of eight Borei-class ballistic missile submarines, three Project 955 subs and five Project 955-A watercraft.
The Borei-class submarines are expected to remain in service for decades to come, at least until 2040.

The first multirole Yasen K-560 Severodvinsk submarine by the pier of the Sevmash shipyard in Severodvinsk.
© Photo: press-service of JSC "PO "Sevmas

Yasen-class submarine

The Project 885 multipurpose attack submarines are touted as the most advanced multipurpose watercraft in the Russian Navy. Designed to replace the Akula-class subs, the Yasen-class subs boast a state-of-the-art design featuring a modified hull profile and modernized equipment.

In addition to its 533-mm torpedoes, a Yasen-class submarine is capable of firing cruise missiles from its eight vertical launching systems. It can also carry Onyx and Kalibr supersonic anti-ship missiles or land attack cruise missiles.

"Yasen-class vessels can slip over 600 meters beneath the waves, rendering them an ever more potent threat to Russia's rivals," the National Interest noted.

Russia's Alexander Nevsky nuclear submarine
© "Sevmash"

Russia's Cutting Edge Submarine Fleet to Receive 'Aircraft Carrier Killer'
The first Yasen-class sub, known as Severodvinsk, entered service in June 2014 and was assigned to Russia's Northern Fleet. Four more Yasen-class submarines are currently under construction.

In addition, Russia plans to expand its high-end submarine fleet with two new fifth generation nuclear-powered watercraft, known only as an "aircraft carrier killer" and an "underwater interceptor" at the moment.

Both submarines are currently under development.
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/2015071 ... z3fw608Hhz

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4834
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 16 Jul 2015 06:03

-deleted-

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 16 Jul 2015 12:31

Navy asks Lockheed Martin to study performance upgrades to Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS submarine torpedoes
July 13, 2015

By John Keller
Editor

torpedoesNEWPORT, R.I., 13 July 2015. U.S. Navy undersea warfare experts are moving forward with plans to upgrade and enhance the Navy's Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS) version of the Mk 48 Mod 7 heavyweight torpedo.

Officials of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division-Newport in Newport, R.I., announced a $26.4 million contract Friday to Lockheed Martin Sippican Inc. in Marion, Mass., for services to improve the Navy's fleet of CBASS submarine-launched torpedoes.

The CBASS broadband sonar makes the torpedo more effective against emerging submarine classes in the harshest of acoustic environments, Lockheed Martin officials say. The Mark 48 Mod 7 CBASS torpedo uses modern commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies in an open-architecture computing environment, and can be improved with regular hardware and software upgrades.

This this contract is for engineering to support the future capability upgrades of the Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS torpedo, as part of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division-Newport’s spiral development program.

Related: Progeny Systems to provide submarine torpedo-defense systems in $6.8 million contract modification

This includes technology assessment, mechanical and electrical component design analysis, software upgrade development, critical item testing, hardware and software integration, certification and test, in-water validation, and life cycle logistics studies for testing components of torpedoes and subsystems.

Lockheed Martin Sippican experts will recommend design changes; address failure and improvements to weapon hardware, software, and firmware; and support government testing.

The Mark 48 Mod 7 torpedo is standard armament for the Navy's fleet of Los Angeles-, Virginia-, and Seawolf-class fast attack submarines, as well as Ohio-class ballistic-missile and cruise-missile submarines.

The Lockheed Martin Corp. Mission Systems and Training segment in Washington is building the Mark 48 Mod 7 CBASS heavyweight torpedo with advanced common broadband advanced sonar system for expanded operational capabilities for shallow waters along coastlines and inside harbors, as well as in the deep-water open ocean.

Related: Boeing to make flying torpedoes able to attack enemy submarines from 30,000 feet

The CBASS torpedo also has the ability of multiband operation with active and passive homing; advanced counter-countermeasure capabilities; effectiveness against low-Doppler shallow submarines, fast deep diving submarines, and high-performance surface ships; autonomous fire-and-forget operation or wire-guide capability to enable post-launch monitoring and updates via the submarine combat system; and running Otto Fuel II as the propellant.

The Mark 48 Mod 7 CBASS torpedo can transmit and receive over a wide frequency band and use broadband signal processing techniques to improve the torpedo’s search, acquisition, and attack, Lockheed Martin officials say.

The Mark 48 torpedo is 19 feet long, 21 inches in diameter, and weighs 3,500 pounds. It can be used as deep as 1,200 feet at distances as far as five miles. The torpedo can travel at 28 knots and has a 650-pound high-explosive warhead.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 16 Jul 2015 22:25

Egypt navy ship 'hit by Sinai militants' missile'

Significant escalation. And consequences.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 17 Jul 2015 05:45

A good watch - when one has some time. It explains how a navy got built from scratch, ruling the waves, supply chain, etc - how things came about. One hour long.




member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby member_22539 » 17 Jul 2015 16:23

NRao wrote:A good watch - when one has some time. It explains how a navy got built from scratch, ruling the waves, supply chain, etc - how things came about. One hour long.




Thanks a million for this wonderful documentary. I finished this one and am going to see the whole series (4 episodes). The BBC makes documentaries second to none (American documentaries are too bombastic and can be jarring in that regard), regardless of their dirty ways.

I would recommend this to everyone.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Jul 2015 17:41

TX for the v.clip. I was privileged to be present at the Trafalgar 200 commemoration at Portsmouth in the UK a few years ago ago. It was a spectacular event that only the Brits can organise and present to perfection.It began with a review of the fleet including international warships. We had the Mysore(?) present,one of the Delhi class. The royal yacht sailed through the lines of proud warships from far and wide with their cheering sailors. In the afternoon, we then watched the event from the shore,preceeded by a horrendous downpour which almost killed off the event.Luckily it stopped at around 1700 hrs for the Red Arrows display,with live feed from the team leader. Then came a re-enactment of Nelson being rowed out to his flagship,boarding the Victory,with several sailing ships playing the part of the English and French men-of-war. A brief interlude till it got dark and during this time the ferries from Spain,etc. sailed into harbour,no cancellations of services,it was a "working port" we were told over the tannoy.

After downing a few stiff ones to beat the cold from a fine nearby hotel bar,we waited for the finale,a fantastic fireworks display simulating the intense firefight between the two fleets.It was just incredible to see the sails and masts of the ships lit up as if by cannon fire,as they "fought" each other.The sound and sparks incredible.One really felt that one was in the middle of the battle two centuries earlier,splendid stuff.The firework display also represented the awful storm afterwards that sank more ships than the battle itself.The weather gods duly obliged! I don't know if the event is still on U-tube or available on a DVD,but worth watching. The skipper then drove us back to London,steering his "ship" in record time.

PS:Interesting to see the naval KA-52 able to carry an improved air-launched version of the Uran. It should be a formidable helo.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3391
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 20 Jul 2015 02:46

The Egyptian patrol boat sunk by ISIS was destroyed by Kornet-E ATGM;

http://charly015.blogspot.com.es/2015/0 ... ipcia.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 20 Jul 2015 19:27

U.S. Admiral says his South China Sea surveillance flight ‘routine’

Admiral Scott Swift, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

Took a seven hour flight on a P-8!!! Over the SCS.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 20 Jul 2015 19:28

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox ... 88716dee93
[quote
China, Russia Planning 20-Ship Naval Exercise in the Sea of Japan in August

By: Sam LaGrone
July 17, 2015

China and Russia will conduct their largest joint Pacific exercise in August near Japan, Russian Navy planners announced on Friday.

Announced last year, Joint Sea Exercise 2015 will occur in both the Sea of Japan and off the cost of Russian region of Primorsky — about 250 miles away from Japan.

“These maneuvers will for the first time involve a joint amphibious assault drill in Russia’s Primorsky territory with the participation of carrier-based aircraft,” Russian Pacific Fleet spokesman Roman Martov said, reported the Russian TASS wire service.

“Representatives of the headquarters of the Russian Pacific Fleet and the Navy of the People’s Liberation Army of China have carried out major work for the planning of the Chinese warships’ visit to Vladivostok port, the cultural program, sports competitions and all the tactical events of the sea, land and air parts of the maneuvers.”

Since 2011, Russia and China have conducted regular joint exercises.

Russian and Chinese ships in the Pacific in 2014. China Daily Photo
Russian and Chinese ships in the Pacific in 2014. China Daily Photo

Last year was the largest series of exercises, the Russian Navy and the PLAN drilled with 14 surface ships, two submarines, aviation assets and special operation forces (SOF), according to Chinese media.

The Pacific drills follow the first ever joint Chinese-Russian exercise in the Mediterranean sea earlier this year. The much smaller exercise featured three Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) and six Russian.

In November, said Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said the combined military-to-military between China and Russia partnership was growing.

“We believe that the main goal of pooling our effort is to shape a collective regional security system,” Shoigu said.
“We also expressed concern over U.S. attempts to strengthen its military and political clout in the [Asia-Pacific Region].”
][/quote]

It would be fun if the IN,which has invited the PLAN for next year's naval review at Vizag,also in the future takes part in a tri-nation naval exercise involving Russia and China. A good counterbalance to planned exercise with Japan and the US.

PS:Guys,Indo-China Sea please,not SCS!

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4834
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 21 Jul 2015 01:31

Anyone came across this? How accurate is this report? I read an old report of a SU-27 taking an aircraft carrier by surprise.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Jul 2015 11:51

A good bit of propaganda,but we won't know the actual truth.However,with the US/NATO aggressively sending in naval forces into the Black Sea and conducting the equiv of "wartime" exercises, one would expect the Russians to react in their own manner,testing the USN's defences with such surprise flights,esp. as their principal naval base for the Black Sea and Meditt. is Sevastopol. Moscow takes Western threats of mil action v.seriously. It is why such worthies like Kissinger have warned against pursuing a new CW foreign policy against Russia despite the UKR crisis,as it could lead to an unexpected crisis from over-reactions on either side.

O'Bomber in recent days has made some surprising but v.laudable foreign policy initiatives.Finding a way to clinch a N-deal with Iran after years of negotiations and the rapproachment with Cuba. If he can lower the temp between Russia and the West and strike a deal with Putin over the UKR ,it would reinvigorate Europe's economy,suffering from the EU's own sanctions against Russia with a loss of billons in trade, and shift the global emphasis with dealing with ISIS,securing the new Afghan govt. from the Taliban and to also reduce tensions in the Far East with China. The global economy is in sh*t street and cannot afford another recession or downturn.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 24 Jul 2015 16:56

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/2 ... F820150723
Exclusive - Japan eyes British help to sink German bid for Australian submarine: sources

TOKYO/SYDNEY | By Tim Kelly, Nobuhiro Kubo and Matt Siegel
Royal Australian Navy submarines (L-R) HMAS Dechaineux, HMAS Waller and HMAS Sheean leave in formation from the Royal Australian Navy base HMAS Stirling, located near Perth, Western Australia in this picture taken on March 22, 2013, provided by the Australian Defence Force. REUTERS/Australian Defence Force/Handout via Reuters

Royal Australian Navy submarines (L-R) HMAS Dechaineux, HMAS Waller and HMAS Sheean leave in formation from the Royal Australian Navy base HMAS Stirling, located near Perth, Western Australia in this picture taken on March 22, 2013, provided by the Australian Defence Force.

Reuters/Australian Defence Force/Handout via Reuters
A Japanese government team is in talks with at least two top British firms to help a Japanese consortium land one of the world's most lucrative defence contracts, sources in Tokyo said, a $50 billion (£32 billion) project to build submarines for Australia.

Germany's ThyssenKrupp (TKMS), a rival bidder, is wooing anxious members of Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s ruling Liberal Party with the economic and political benefits of its proposal.

Two Japanese government officials and a company source in Tokyo said Babcock International Group and BAE Systems had approached the consortium of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries with offers of help. Other British defence contractors may also be involved, they said.

ADVERTISING
All three sources spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

Both Babcock and BAE declined to say whether they would work with the consortium, the builders of Japan's 4,000-ton Soryu diesel-electric submarine, on the Australian project.

A spokesman for Japan's defence ministry said the Japanese bidders were responding to Australia's desire to have as much local participation as possible in the project.

"With Mitsubishi Heavy taking the lead, we are gathering information from both Japanese and foreign companies in regard to Australian industry but we are unable to disclose any specific names," the spokesman said.

Both Babcock and BAE Systems are well established in Australia. Industry sources in Europe said any decision by Babcock to work with the Japanese bid could unsettle TKMS and France's state-controlled naval contractor DCNS, which is also in the fray for the submarine contract.

Babcock does maintenance work on Australia's Collins-class submarines, including the torpedo tubes and other parts of its weapons system.

BAE Systems, which builds the U.K.'s nuclear submarines, employs 4,500 people in Australia. It's biggest project there is the construction of Australia's two new 27,000-ton Canberra-class amphibious assault ships, the largest ships ever to be operated by the Royal Australian Navy.

"Japan is arguably ahead of the Germans and French in regard to its technology but lags in terms of doing business in Australia and organising an industrial package there," one of the sources in Japan said.

Japan may also seek cooperation from Saab by tapping the engineers at the Swedish company who built and still help maintain the Collins-class submarine fleet, the sources said.

Saab also declined to comment.
POLITICAL WORRIES

Parliamentary colleagues of Abbott have told Reuters that the fear of a serious blowback from failing to choose the winner of the contract wisely is one of the most hotly debated topics within the ruling party. The bidders were well aware of this, they said.

According to a company document seen by Reuters, the German bidder TKMS will train local contractors using advanced German manufacturing and production technology and help establish Australia as a naval shipbuilding and repair hub in the Asia-Pacific region. The document is to be shared privately with Australian government ministers as part of the proposal.

That is an attractive proposition for a country still reeling from the decision by Ford Motor Co, Toyota Motor Corp and General Motors Co to halt local production in 2016.

Two TKMS executives told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday that the Australian government would struggle politically to turn down the economic incentives built into their proposal.

"There's an awful lot of politicians across the board ... that will not be very politically happy if this A$50 billion life cost sophisticated programme goes to solve Japan's deficit problem," TKMS Australia Chairman John White told Reuters.

Senator Sean Edwards - chairman of the economics committee in the upper house of Australia's parliament - said that no government could say yes to any proposal that did not offer significant economic benefits for Australia.

"I think it's compelling (to build the submarines in Australia). And I think this is a problem for Japan," Edwards told Reuters.

However, Australia's Abbot has described Japan as his country's "closest friend in Asia". With the United States also keen to spur friendlier ties between its two key allies in Asia, Tokyo has Washington's backing for made-in-Japan submarines packed with American surveillance, radar and weapons equipment, sources familiar with Washington's thinking told Reuters earlier.

Each of the bidders have been asked to provide three estimates; one for construction overseas, one for a partial assembly in Australia and one for a full build in an Australian shipyard. A recommendation is likely in November.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Jul 2015 20:32

Incredible images of missile exploding over USS The Sullivans right after launch

http://theaviationist.com/2015/07/23/mi ... r-us-ship/

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36299
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 26 Jul 2015 04:03

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... 11337044=1
that LCS splashing into river is at amazing 30* angle to surface..

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66605
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 Jul 2015 16:58

Note the changes fincantieri made to the yard itself

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7479
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 Jul 2015 18:22

SaiK wrote:http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/ships/2015/07/25/lcs-hits-its-stride-marinette/30610703/?sf11337044=1
that LCS splashing into river is at amazing 30* angle to surface..



Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66605
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 Jul 2015 18:31

That's a tried and tested side launch technique.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 27 Jul 2015 16:39

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... trine.html

Putin eyes Russian strength in Atlantic and Arctic in new naval doctrine


Kremlin says the revised strategy comes in response to 'unacceptable' NATO plans to move military infrastructure towards Russia's borders

By Agencies 27 Jul 2015

Russian President Vladimir Putin has approved a new naval doctrine that aims to guarantee a strong Russian presence in the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean and the Arctic amid concerns about NATO expansion.

The new doctrine states that NATO is pursuing "unacceptable" plans to move military infrastructure to Russia's borders. It also seeks to boost the strategic positions of the Russian navy in the Black Sea.

Mr Putin gave his approval on Sunday at a meeting with military officials and Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin in Baltiisk, where he observed elaborate ceremonies marking Navy Day.

Mr Rogozin, a strong critic of NATO, told the meeting that the new doctrine reflects "changes in the international political situation and the objective strengthening of Russia as a great naval power."

Published on the Kremlin website, the updated version of the Russian Navy's doctrine comes six months after a revised military doctrine that dramatically reflected deteriorating relations with the West.

NATO was already seen as a major threat in an earlier version of the doctrine published in 2010, but the war in Ukraine has further raised tensions to levels not seen since the Cold War.

The Russian text sets targets of "developing infrastructures" for its fleet at the Black Sea in Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula annexed in 2014 by Russia.

It also calls for the "accelerated reconstitution and completion of strategic Russian positions" in the Black Sea.

Vladimir Putin orders creation of new reservist force

EU condemns Russia over 'creeping annexation' of Georgia

Mr Rogozin highlighted "the accent put on the Atlantic and the Arctic" in the new doctrine.

"Our attention towards the Atlantic is justified by the expansion of NATO in the East," he told Russian news agencies.

The doctrine also stipulates the aim of "guaranteeing an adequate military naval presence for Russia in" the Atlantic region.

The same target was set for the Mediterranean, with a deployment of a "permanent manner".

For the energy-rich Arctic, the doctrine wants to "reduce threats on national security and to guarantee strategic stability."

It also sees the "development of a Northern Fleet".

"These changes show that Russia pays particular attention to the reinforcement of its naval potential in the Arctic and the Atlantic to counter NATO," military expert Alexander Golts on Moscow Echos radio said.

But "without a decisive reinforcement of the fleet's capacities, all of these make no sense," he added.

NATO agreed in February to dramatically boost its defences with six command centres in eastern Europe and a spearhead force of 5,000 troops, to counter what the alliance called Russian aggression in Ukraine.

Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 522
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Nick_S » 28 Jul 2015 04:35

Singha wrote:That's a tried and tested side launch technique.


I hope there was no one inside at the time.... teehee.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Jul 2015 12:43

What’s behind Beijing’s drive to control the South China Sea?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/j ... sea-hainan
China’s startling attempt to assert control over vast waters has alarmed nearby countries and escalated tensions with the US. Howard W French reports from Hainan, the island at the heart of Xi Jinping’s expansionist ambitions.

A satellite image of Chinese land reclamation on Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands. Photograph: DigitalGlobe/Getty Images

Howard W French
Tuesday 28 July 2015

On 26 May, CNN broadcast an unusual clip of a US navy intelligence flight over the South China Sea. The P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane – one of the newest weapons in the Pentagon’s arsenal – had taken off, with a CNN reporter on board, from Clark airbase in the Philippines, once part of America’s largest overseas base complex during the cold war. After about 45 minutes, the plane reached its first target – which had, until recently, been an obscure, almost entirely submerged feature in the Spratly Island group.

Fifteen thousand feet below, dozens of Chinese ships tossed at anchor. Their crews had been working day and night for weeks, dredging sand and rock from the ocean floor to fill in a stunning blue lagoon – turning a 3.7-mile-long reef that had only partially revealed itself to the daylight at low tide into a sizable man-made island nearly 1,000 miles away from the Chinese mainland.

At the approach of the American aircraft, a Chinese radio operator can be heard addressing the pilot: “This is the Chinese navy. This is the Chinese navy … Please leave immediately to avoid misunderstanding.” When the plane, which was busily photographing the land-reclamation effort, failed to heed these instructions, the operator grew exasperated, and the recording ends as abruptly as it had begun, with him shouting the words: “You go!”

China’s land grab in the South China Sea

For many people who viewed this clip, it might have almost passed for entertainment, but the plane continued on to a place called Fiery Cross, whose history and recent development point to how deadly serious the struggle over the South China Sea has become. Fiery Cross came under Chinese control in 1988, following a confrontation with Vietnam at a nearby site, Johnson Reef, where Chinese troops opened fire from a ship on a contingent of Vietnamese soldiers who stood in knee-deep seas after having planted their country’s flag in the coral. A YouTube video of the incident shows dozens of Vietnamese being cut down in the water under a hail of machine-gun fire.

China had come late to the game of laying claim to parts of the Spratly archipelago, which comprises hundreds of uninhabited coral reefs and sandbars flung across a vast area between the coasts of the Philippines and southern Vietnam, each of which has long controlled numerous positions in the area. But in this bloody way, China announced that it was fully committed. Its position on Fiery Cross Reef, staked out back in the 1980s, was initially justified under the auspices of Unesco, which had called on the nations of the world to cooperate in collectively surveying the oceans for meteorological and navigation purposes. Fast-forward 28 years, though, and as seen from the American surveillance flight, what had begun as an innocuous “ocean observation station”, has now mushroomed in less than a year of dredging into the most important of Beijing’s seven newly created positions in the South China Sea.

From a single coral head that peaked a mere metre out of the waves, Fiery Cross has grown in stunning fashion, attaining a size of over 200 hectares of reclaimed land – roughly equivalent to about 280 football pitches. Leaving little doubt about its purpose, it has already been equipped with a 3,300-metre airstrip, which is long enough to accommodate a wide range of Chinese combat and transport planes, and a harbour big enough to handle even the largest of the country’s ships.

The primary attraction of this locale, though, may be something that cannot be perceived from even the most sophisticated surveillance plane, which from China’s perspective is precisely the point. Fiery Cross appears to have been chosen by Beijing as the keystone in its push into the South China Sea because of the depths of its surrounding waters, which afford Chinese submarines far greater stealth in evading acoustic and other forms of active tracking by the US military.

The partially built airstrip on Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Islands, in April 2015.

The partially built airstrip on Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Islands, in April 2015. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

There is no single explanation for why asserting its authority over the South China Sea now matters so much to China. Controlling the many tiny islands is in part a matter of controlling of the wealth assumed to lay beneath the sea in the form of unexploited minerals and oil and gas, not to mention the immense fisheries that exist in these waters. It is in part a matter of increasing the country’s sense of security, by dominating the maritime approaches to its long coast, and securing sea lanes to the open Pacific. It is in part a matter of overcoming historical grievances. And finally, it is about becoming a power at least on par with the US: a goal that Chinese leaders are themselves somewhat coy about, but which is now increasingly entering the public discourse.

The best place to see all these reasons at work is the country’s southernmost province, the island of Hainan.

Right from the taxi stand at the ultramodern train station in semi-tropical Sanya, there was no mistaking how different this seaside city was going to be from the rest of China. It was late December and already frigid across the rest of the country – and even chilly in the north of Hainan island, from where my fellow disembarking passengers had all arrived.

As we joined the long queue for cabs, people busied themselves peeling off layers of clothing, and making an ostentatious show of their resortwear underneath. There were two who stood out in particular, first the buxom lady in front of me in the low-cut knockoff Gucci T-shirt, who chewed her gum with a demonstrative little snap. Then there was the guy a couple of spots behind, but seemingly joined to her by a current of energy. He appeared to be well into his 40s, but he sported a boyband haircut, and wore a skimpy singlet and conspicuous gold chain. Every time our line turned a corner, sending the herded passengers ahead of us snaking back in the opposite direction, he leaned on the guiderails, smiling as he craned for a glimpse of her breasts. These were not nouveaux riches exactly, but they were exemplars of new Chinese wealth nonetheless, a wealth that is creating a giant middle class that is yearning to do all of the things that middle classes everywhere are wont to do, and not necessarily in stages either, but rather as hurriedly as possible, and, indeed for some of them, all at once.

That, in fact, is a fairly complete explanation of Sanya’s most famous raison d’être. It is, in the new China, a bucket-list city par excellence, a purpose-built place on the southern coast of Hainan Island that is kept warm year round by the currents of the South China Sea. In the winter, huge numbers of Chinese arrive here every week, much like pilgrims, except for the fact that their god, the god of leisure and consumerism, is of very recent vintage in this country.

I, too, had come because of the sea, but not for any of its popular attractions. The beaches of Sanya have become famous among Chinese as their country’s answer to Hawaii, but this is not the only thing the place has in common with America’s 50th state. While the vacationing hordes headed off for the local version of Waikiki, long rows of fancy, newly sprouted hotels and vacation rental high-rises, I had come in hopes of getting a glimpse of the closest thing in China to Pearl Harbor.

Just as a fast-expanding US used that naval base, beginning late in the 19th century, to project American power deep into the Pacific, an ocean that it would eventually come to thoroughly dominate, China is leveraging Hainan island to press some startling claims – not to mere dominance, but for rightful possession of virtually the entire South China Sea, a body of water that encompasses 1.35 million square miles, and through which more than $5tn in ship-borne trade passes every year.

China’s neighbours have watched with growing alarm as Beijing has used maritime vessels, often setting out from Hainan, to harass and intimidate the far smaller rival claimants whose littoral territories both enclose the South China Sea and lend it definition. Recently, for example, China sent a large flotilla of ships close to the shores of Vietnam as it deployed a billion-dollar oil rig that an official of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation described as “our national mobile territory”, while it made a show of prospecting for crude in deep water. As it did so, China kept a collection of much smaller, protesting Vietnamese vessels at bay by blasting them with massive water cannons powerful enough to sink many ships. At other locations, not far away, Chinese ships have intercepted vessels from the Philippines – sometimes by deliberately ramming them – to stop them from resupplying troops who guard disputed coral reefs that lie several times closer to Filipino shores than to anything conventionally understood as Chinese territory. It was against this backdrop that China began its own crash programme of dredging the oceans to build man-made islands in at least seven locations in the South China Sea in 2014.

Tianya Haijiao Park, Sanya.

Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

The beaches of Sanya have become famous among Chinese as their country’s answer to Hawaii Photograph: Getty Images/Lonely Planet Image

But there is much more at stake in China’s plans for Hainan than the possession of a few spits of sand and rock hundreds of miles to the south. China’s coastguard, until recently very modest in size, is growing so fast that by the next decade it will boast more tonnage than the coastguards of the US, Japan and all of its south-east Asian neighbours combined. The Chinese coastguard’s ships are so large that they dwarf the platforms of many navies, blurring the lines that have traditionally distinguished these two services. And because its purpose is asserting mastery of the sea over a collection of far weaker neighbours to the south, much of this rising force will call Hainan its home.

The Chinese coastguard’s ships are so large that they dwarf the platforms of many navies

For all of its strengths, where China’s new maritime might is concerned, the coastguard is still the little league. With quite distinct purposes in mind – namely the increasingly intense security competition between Beijing and Washington – China is rapidly equipping itself with the world’s largest submarine fleet, including a new force of nuclear ballistic missile vessels. It has also launched programmes to build a fleet of modern aircraft carriers, and the full range of associated battleships. In Hawaii, 5,800 miles away, the berths of the US’s most formidable naval assets and that state’s world-famous beaches are situated in different parts of the most-visited island, Oahu. But here in Hainan, just outside of Sanya, China’s newest and most advanced naval docks and its best beaches are located practically right next to each other, and I had gone there in order to try to have a look.

China is two years into what figures to be the 10-year tenure of Xi Jinping as president and head of the Communist party; many observers already describe him as the country’s most powerful leader since Mao Zedong. The previous holder of this distinction was Deng Xiaoping, who is credited with ending Maoism, opening China to foreign investment and putting the country on a path of explosive growth that is now into its fourth decade. But even Deng had to contend with peers in the party hierarchy who were far more conservative than him. Most leaders in the post-Mao era have had to spend several years laboriously consolidating power before announcing anything that smacks of a personal agenda. As a measure of his ambition, Xi, by contrast, announced a watchword for his rule in his very first days in office, and it is one that the state media has never departed from. The new leader’s agenda would be what he called the “great dream of national revitalisation”, which is often interpreted to mean lifting China to the first rank of world powers and reclaiming for it the preeminent place that every schoolchild learns was China’s lot for the majority of recorded history.

For most of the period between Mao’s death in 1976 and the advent of Xi, China followed the adage, attributed to Deng, of “hiding one’s capabilities and biding time”. This meant, above all, deliberately keeping a low profile in the world while the country steadfastly accumulated wealth and power. From the outset, what Xi called “the China dream” put a decisive end to all that.

During his first year in power, without warning, China suddenly proclaimed a so-called ADIZ (air defence identification zone) that covers an expansive maritime area separating China from Japan and includes a hotly contested group of tiny islands, known as the Senkakus (Japanese) or Diaoyu (Chinese), which have been under largely undisputed Japanese control since 1879. China followed up on this action almost immediately with a series of gestures that seemed designed to demonstrate its restored strength to its southern neighbours. In Xi’s early days in office, the country’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, which was acquired several years ago from Ukraine and then extensively refurbished, was sent with a full battle group of other warships on a maiden cruise straight into many of the most fiercely disputed areas of the South China Sea.

China’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning. Photograph: China Daily/Reuters

However muscular Xi’s moves might at first appear, no one should think that he is a warmonger. China has as rich and sophisticated a tradition of statecraft as any nation, and a capacity for diplomacy of great subtlety. What the new Chinese leader has openly declared that he wants, though, is an Asia administered by Asians, and this is an idea that runs straight through Hainan island, and should be taken seriously. To grasp what it might mean requires thinking about the past as much as looking to the future.

There is nothing more central to the China dream than China’s idea of its rightful place in the world – which, Chinese people are relentlessly taught, they were robbed of first by European imperialism and then by an American-imposed Asian order that has been in place since the end of the second world war. Prior to this, for nearly the entire run of their nation’s long history, save for the occasional parenthetical setback, the Chinese understand themselves to have enjoyed well-deserved paramountcy in the vastness of the east. This has meant not just preeminence, but deference from neighbours eager to curry favour and share in the fruits of China’s brilliant culture.

“In East Asia’s tribute system, China was the superior state, and many of its neighbouring states were vassal states, and they maintained a relationship of tribute and rewards,” writes Liu Mingfu, a retired People’s Liberation Army colonel, in The China Dream, a hugely popular recent book that lays out plans for the country’s return to preeminence. “This was a special regional system through which they maintained friendly relations and provided mutual aid. The appeal and influence of ancient China’s political, economic and cultural advantages were such that smaller neighbouring states naturally fell into orbit around China, and many of the small countries nominally attached to China’s ruling dynasty sent regular tribute … The universal spread of China’s civilisation and the variety of nations that sent emissaries to China were simply a reflection of the attractiveness of the central nation, and the admiration that neighbouring countries had for China’s civilisation.”

It is true that many territories paid tribute to China, which they may have judged to be a small price for gaining access to trade with the world’s richest economy. But it is also true that China often used force to gain dominance over others, whether the Koreans or the Burmese or, most famously, Vietnam, which China occupied for 1,000 years. Through the teaching of history in this selective fashion, however, Chinese supremacy is made to appear to be the natural order of things, and never something that was forcibly imposed; hegemony, in Chinese usage, is a state of affairs that can only result from the actions of ill-intentioned foreigners.



Hegemony, in Chinese usage, is a state of affairs that can only result from the actions of ill-intentioned foreigners

Lingering threads of this kind of thought are evident in Beijing’s interactions with Japan, its only conceivable rival in the region. That status is one that a fast-rising China appears increasingly unable to abide. Similar motivations can be detected in the recent proliferation of extraordinary infrastructure schemes, in which all new roads will lead to the Rome of the East, otherwise known as Beijing. These include new transcontinental rail lines with high-speed passenger service and immense freight capacity that will completely outclass Russia’s badly aging Trans Siberian Railway, as well as the integration of south-east Asia into the Chinese rail network through Chinese-built railways in Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, and Laos. It also includes a maritime trade network of ports and depots that span the Indian Ocean, culminating in east Africa, an important frontier of China’s expanding interests. Under one variation or another, Beijing has called all of these “new Silk Roads”, an appellation that is meant to conjure Chinese centrality and grandeur.

As it moved on all of these fronts, in the space of a mere two years, China has astutely built from scratch a major new multilateral bank, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, which will be run under its leadership, competing with such western-led institutions as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, to fund construction projects that will inevitably play to China’s industrial strengths. The US was caught off-guard, and perhaps feeling that its own 70-year-old imperium in Asia was threatened, responded by snubbing the bank even as 56 countries – including many old-line allies in Europe, not least Britain – rushed to join the new institution.

As immensely ambitious projects such as these proceed, the gap in wealth and power between China and its maritime neighbours will continue to widen. Beijing’s hopes for the future seem to align with the way China teaches the history of its imperial past – in which nearby states will pragmatically accept that the price of China’s favour is deference.

Still, in order to retain a sliver of legitimacy for its claims to rightful control of nearly all of the South China Sea, and to preserve the hope of a peaceful outcome in pressing these claims, China needs a respectable theory to justify them. And just as surely as it is building islands at sea, it has phalanxes of people working away to make that case.

* * *

In the bureaucratic wars that determine how Beijing allocates state resources, many players have recently discovered that invoking China’s territorial interests in the South China Sea is the equivalent of pushing on a wide-open door. By now, as a result, the task of defending China’s “sacred rights” over this body of water – a stock phrase used in official propaganda – has become something of a mad scramble.

At the top of the heap comes the People’s Liberation Army Navy, a service that has one of the fastest-growing budgets in what is already a very rapidly expanding Chinese military. Next comes the China Coast Guard, a behemoth created in 2013 by the consolidation of five law-enforcement agencies that overlapped each other and routinely engaged in ferocious rivalries. Experts say that the integration is still far from complete, and that even oversight of the China Coast Guard is split between different authorities, each with its own rival interests. There is also the Ministry of Public Security, and something called the State Oceanic Administration. And this list only accounts for the national players. Beneath them come myriad provincial agencies and actors and big private companies that claim to promote law enforcement, to supervise fisheries, to explore for oil and gas, and to promote tourism.

Probably the biggest boondoggle of all in this regard is Sansha, in the Paracel island group, which was declared in 2012 to be one of China’s almost 300 prefectural level cities – an administrative designation typically reserved for places with millions of residents. Sansha, home to all of 1,500 civilians, is located on a mere dot in the sea called Woody Island – but China moved to elevate its status immediately after Vietnam passed a law declaring ownership of the Paracels, which are also claimed by Taiwan. All told, the Paracels consist of about 130 coral islands and reefs totalling less than three square miles in surface area. China has controlled the entire group since the 1970s, when it first used force to evict Vietnamese soldiers from the islands, a decade and a half before the shootout with Vietnam in the Spratlys. Since then, in an ostentatious fit of patriotism, the Hainan government and an array of Chinese corporations have lavished investments on public works and amenities of all kinds on the island, starting with solar panels, a power grid and a state-of-the-art desalination plant. Plans are now afoot to welcome cruise ships there, so that flag-waving Chinese tourists can be lectured on their country’s inalienable rights to the region before setting off to gaze upon other rocky protuberances in the region that China claims as territory.



Many of China’s neighbours, and indeed the US, regard the assertion of its claims to tiny reefs and rocky formations located as far as 1,800 miles away from Hainan’s coast – and sometimes only dozens of miles from other coastal south-east Asian states – as a bald-faced territorial grab, something faintly reminiscent of the European-led high imperial era of the late 19th century. The search for a theory that could help distinguish China’s claims from a simple case of might makes right led me one morning to the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, in Haikou, the grey and chilly administrative capital of Hainan, to see its founding director, Wu Shicun.

I had been picked up at my downtown hotel by two young men who worked at the centre and driven in a van through the rain to their workplace, which occupies a large, verdant plot located where the town petered out. There, I was met at the entrance by a pleasant young woman named Yang Yang, who would serve as my hostess. She led me into the institute through giant wooden doors and performed a quick tour of the impressive facilities, explaining that Dr Wu was tied up, and would be with me shortly. I was immediately struck by how everything seemed built to a standard of extra-generous spaciousness, as if crowds of experts regularly gathered here, and this insistently drew one’s attention to the unavoidable fact that in room after room, there was no one around. Saddest of all, perhaps, was the capacious library, a space with a well-lit study floor full of desks, in addition, of course, to stacks, which I was told were full of volumes in both Chinese and foreign languages. There, I encountered but a single person – a rather pained-looking young librarian.

When the tour was finished, Yang asked me if I would mind watching a short film about the institute, explaining that “all the guests do”. As a photographer took pictures of me, perhaps for use in a scrapbook, the lights in the projection room were dimmed, and the movie began with images of coastguard ships ploughing through high seas, as a narrator spoke in English in a booming voice: “The advent of the ocean century brings with it unprecedented opportunities.” A blue highlight flashed onto the screen covering virtually the entire South China Sea, right up to the shores of other neighbouring states. The narrator said nothing about risks, announcing instead: “The sea is crucial to the development of China and its future as a maritime state.”

When the seance had finally ended, I was led up the stairway a couple of floors to Wu’s gigantic office, where he greeted me almost as a diplomat might, with a handshake and stiff smile from behind his large, wooden desk, his mane of silver hair swept back dramatically. I had been led to believe that my host was mightily busy, but as our conversation got under way, the impression one got in his formal, clutter-free office could not have been more different. In a meeting that lasted more than an hour, we were not interrupted, and never once did Wu check any devices for messages. The only other activity was performed by his assistant, Yang, who sat nearby throughout, taking notes.

Wu launched into a historical explanation, telling me that China was the first to discover all the tiny islands that dot the South China Sea, the first to name them and the first to assert effective control over them. “Our exercise of jurisdiction began as early as the Tang Dynasty, in the ninth century,” he said, adding “[all of these places] were under the administration of Yan County, in Hainan.”

He was not happy when I replied that I had spent the past few years studying this historical record for a book, learning – among other things – that although ships from as far away as Persia commonly travelled to China via the Malacca Strait, there is scant archaeological record of Chinese ships in maritime south-east Asian lands prior to the 15th century, not long before the first European imperialists turned up in the region, changing everything for ever. “I thought he came here to discuss the law,” he reproached his assistant sternly in Chinese.

The onset of a fever in the region around maritime issues can be traced to China’s revival of an artefact of its early-20th-century history, known as the Nine-Dash Line. This line, which made its first official appearance in 1947, under the nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek, encloses virtually all of the South China Sea in a loop that dangles southward from the Asian mainland in a shape that has been likened to a cow’s tongue. Chiang was defeated two years later by the forces of Mao Zedong, after a long and brutal civil war, and for decades afterwards almost nothing was heard of the Nine-Dash Line. China set off alarms in the region when it began resuscitating the line early in this decade, giving it renewed prominence in state propaganda, and including it on a map contained in all new Chinese passports. At a 2010 ministerial conference of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Hanoi, the Chinese foreign minister responded to criticisms of its moves in the region by dressing down his Singaporean counterpart, telling him: “China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that’s just a fact.” This created a feeling held widely in the region that despite a decade of soothing talk from Beijing about good-neighbourliness and win-win relations, China was reverting to an old form of behaviour, whether that of the wounded revanchist, or the central kingdom demanding obeisance.

Since then, after losing in a showdown with China over Scarborough Shoal, a reef located 123 miles from its shores, the Philippines has taken the lead in the region in challenging China’s sense of entitlement, bringing a case contesting the validity of the Nine-Dash Line before a tribunal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), and drawing repeated expressions of outrage from Beijing at its impertinence. China has vowed to ignore any unfavourable ruling by the tribunal, despite being a signatory of the convention. Similarly, Wu told me that China would not negotiate territorial issues in the sea on a multilateral basis with neighbouring states, nor would it accept outside mediation. This would leave no way forward, except for China’s much smaller and increasingly dependent neighbours to negotiate with it one on one.

Protesters stage a rally outside the Chinese embassy in Manila demanding that China pull out of the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.

Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Protesters stage a rally outside the Chinese embassy in Manila demanding that China pull out of the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. Photograph: Dondi Tawatao/Getty Images

As set in stone as these positions sounded, Beijing’s approach to control of the South China Sea has evolved in important, if subtle, ways since international public opinion, especially in the region, has turned critical of its actions. Most notably, China has seized on the vagueness inherent in the Nine-Dash Line, for which it has never attributed specific geographic coordinates, to suggest that people opposing it are tilting at windmills. “China has never claimed the entire South China Sea,” Wu told me. “China just claims sovereignty over islands, reefs and features, above water or submerged, and also to adjacent waters. If an island can sustain human life that, of course, generates an EEZ.” This term – standing for exclusive economic zone – means an area extending 200 nautical miles out to sea for China’s sole economic use. But the only justifications Wu offered for China’s claims to these features were the same historical arguments that we had already more or less agreed to disagree about, and which have no standing under the law of the sea.

This led me, at last, to ask Wu what this was really all about. Why is it so important for China to control essentially all of this body of water, extending nearly 2,000 miles from its nearest conventionally defined coastline? “The reason that this has become an important issue is geopolitics,” he replied. “The South China Sea is located at the edge of the Pacific Ocean, and this attracts the interest of many other countries – the US, Japan, India, and others.” Others have long speculated about whether China’s obsession was driven by an unproven conviction that the sea contained immense reserves of hydrocarbons, or whether it had more to do with fishing rights and food security. But Wu was now telling me that this was, in effect, about power.

My visit to the institute concluded with a tour of a room full of wall-mounted maps, carefully assembled to build the picture of China’s historical control over islands in the region, especially those in the Spratly chain. Once again, I was led by Yang, who stood off in the distance while I gave some of the maps a careful inspection. “Time immemorial” is a favourite official expression for explaining the duration of its claims to them, but as I looked at these old maps, I noticed that despite being written entirely in Chinese, the names of the islands were all phoneticised versions of the names westerners had given them in the 18th and 19th centuries.

* * *

It would be wrong to conclude that the Chinese position merely consists of cosmological bluster, even if it is true that there is plenty of that. Beyond the often glorified and euphemised imperial past, when neighbours reputedly prostrated themselves before the emperor in order to enjoy the privileges of trade, China draws on far fresher sources of motivation. Beijing’s attitudes toward the South China Sea, like much of the country’s behaviour as an emerging superpower, is bound up in an entirely modern Chinese obsession: overcoming the humiliations of the recent past.

Since Sun Yat-sen, the early-20th-century founder of the Republic of China, every modern leader has harboured dreams of restoring the country to the position it enjoyed before imperial China was ripped asunder by Britain (and France) in the opium wars, and then trampled by Japan in a series of degrading wars that began in the 1890s. For Chinese leaders of the 20th, and now 21st century, that means restoring lost territories: most obviously Taiwan but also the Diaoyu islands. Just as important are the rights China is convinced – or has convinced itself – it deserves to the South China Sea.

Sun’s successor, and Mao Zedong’s greatest historical rival, Chiang Kai-shek, began keeping a diary in 1928, in which he created a daily entry under the heading Xuechi, meaning “avenge”, or “wipe clean humiliation”. It came to include everything from venting about the need to destroy the “dwarf pirates”, which is how he often referred to the Japanese he was at war with, to the need to eventually create textbooks that would inculcate his ideas about the people’s duty to restore China’s size and glory. One entry reads: “Recover Taiwan and Korea. Recover the land that was originally part of the Han and Tang dynasty. Then, as descendants of the Yellow Emperor, we will have no shame.”

Nationalism in China, which has swelled around these kinds of sentiments, has become a vital tool for the Communist party leadership. Yet officials have sometimes stoked these feelings in such a crude manner that it has become a hindrance to their freedom of action, and potentially even a threat to their own survival. When the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, said in June, for example, that any retreat by Beijing from its South China Sea claims would not be forgiven by future generations, he might as well have said that the country’s leaders could not get away with compromise on these issues.

But there is an even more recent imperative at work in Beijing’s calculations than the matter of overcoming the humiliations of the last two centuries, and its name is the US. Today, it is that country and not Europe or even Japan, which is seen as the main obstacle to Beijing’s regional ambitions. There is simply no way for China to reign supreme in the South China Sea so long as the US has a free run of the western Pacific. Even more than cowing its neighbours, China’s island-building strategy would seem to have the US navy as its primary focus.

There is no way for China to rule the South China Sea so long as the US has a free run of the western Pacific

The waters off Hainan, near the Yalin navy base, where China maintains its nuclear submarine fleet, are notoriously shallow, scarcely 10 metres deep in many places, making it easy to spot submarines on their sorties from the island. By establishing a number of man-made island positions in the Spratlys, China seems to be pursuing a number of complementary goals. The first is reducing the ability of the US fleet to operate with impunity throughout the region. It is frequently noted that China’s tiny new islets would be impossible to defend in a conflict, but that is to miss the point. By establishing radar and maritime acoustic arrays throughout the South China Sea, along with surveillance flights of its own, Beijing will improve its real-time information, or situational awareness in the region and enhance its ability to engage enemy combatants before they can approach the Chinese mainland. As noted, with its deep surrounding waters, a place such as Fiery Cross might also serve as a convenient way station for China’s submarines.


Advertisement



It may turn out that the encounter with the US Poseidon surveillance aircraft recorded by CNN was more than passingly revealing about China’s ambitions for its newly built islands, and about the geopolitical contest that will unfold around them. Under Unclos, which China signed in 1996, and the US has never ratified, artificial islands built atop submerged features such as the reefs flown over that day do not entitle a country to territorial rights – and yet, there was the presumed voice of a Chinese soldier telling the Americans to go away.

From declaring that it will not abide by any Unclos ruling against it, it would not be such a large step for China to depart from Unclos altogether – particularly since the US has never joined – and insist that its new positions in the South China Sea be given a wide berth by others, in the surrounding waters and in the skies overhead. Such a decision would be risky for China in terms of the image it would like to project as a peaceable and constructive rising power, but challenging it would be risky for others, not least the US.

On the eve of a recent tour of the region, where he attended an annual Asian security conference in Singapore, the US defence secretary Ashton Carter vowed to frustrate any Chinese efforts to limit the movements of American vessels in the South China Sea. “The United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows, as we do all around the world,” Carter declared in Pearl Harbor. And to this, he joined another vow. “We will remain the principal security power in the Asia-Pacific for decades to come,” he said.

Unsurprisingly, in China, people have begun to take a different view of the future. “In 10 years, our GDP will be bigger than the US, in 20 years our military spending will be equal to the US,” said Shen Dingli, one of China’s most prominent international relations scholars, who I met in Washington. “Thirty to 40 years from now, our armed forces will be better than the US. Why would the US defend those rocks? When you have power, the world has to accept. The US is a superpower today, and it can do whatever it wants. When China is a superpower, the world will also have to accept.”

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66605
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 Jul 2015 12:54

for Philip sir and other old sea dogs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/world ... antes.html

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Jul 2015 16:01

Singha,no "sir" please.Her Majesty hasn't knighted me yet and never will!

that was a good yarn.Any idea how much we lose to poaching in our EEZ? I know that the Japanese and the Thais used to be prime offenders.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 506
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SNaik » 28 Jul 2015 16:30

Austin wrote:Incredible images of missile exploding over USS The Sullivans right after launch

http://theaviationist.com/2015/07/23/mi ... r-us-ship/


Russian response just a few days later :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLG2pxhJscQ

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16239
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 28 Jul 2015 16:57

SNaik wrote:
Austin wrote:Incredible images of missile exploding over USS The Sullivans right after launch

http://theaviationist.com/2015/07/23/mi ... r-us-ship/


Russian response just a few days later :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLG2pxhJscQ


That close to a populated area in peace time. Wonder why they would do that?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66605
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 28 Jul 2015 17:53

Philip wrote:Singha,no "sir" please.Her Majesty hasn't knighted me yet and never will!

that was a good yarn.Any idea how much we lose to poaching in our EEZ? I know that the Japanese and the Thais used to be prime offenders.


they used to sneak into the andaman area to steal . but must be a lot harder now with lots of CG vessels , planes and coastal radar networks.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 506
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SNaik » 28 Jul 2015 20:00

NRao wrote:That close to a populated area in peace time. Wonder why they would do that?

Naval Revue dedicated to the annual Navy Day on 26 July. The footage is from Sevastopol, Putin was attending the one in Kaliningrad. RuNavy had a good chance to get a new CiC if the accident would have happened there. :)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 29 Jul 2015 12:22

Some interesting facts on Russian warship costs and modernization of a Kirov class CGN,the battlecruiser,Adm.Nakhimov.
https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/page/2/
For Nakhimov’s Price
Posted on July 21, 2015
Admiral Nakhimov? (photo: Topwar.ru)

The photo above appears to be Kirov-class CGN Admiral Nakhimov (ex-Kalinin) having its superstructure dismantled at Sevmash. Topwar.ru didn’t indicate how it came by the picture.

Blogger Aleksandr Shishkin recently offered his rationale (and that of other navy advocates) for repairing and modernizing Admiral Nakhimov.

As a shipbuilder, Shishkin says the “enemies of these monster-ships” think that the extraordinary expenditures required to renovate Nakhimov could be redirected to better use for the Russian military. But he contends that Russia’s nuclear-powered guided missile cruisers have a disproportionate military-political effect when compared to other ways of spending this part of the MOD budget.

First, he makes a military firepower argument.

He argues that Nakhimov provides more “bang for the ruble” measured against new surface combatant construction. He offers as an example the proyekt 20380 Steregushchiy-class corvettes of which five, with a total of 100 missiles, can be bought for Nakhimov’s price. Two and one-half proyekt 22350 Gorshkov-class frigates can be bought for Nakhimov’s price. Three Gorshkovs have 144 missiles. Or, for the cost of Nakhimov, one future proyekt 23560 (Lider) destroyer with approximately 136 launchers could be bought.

Shishkin projects 304 missiles on the renovated Nakhimov — 224 SAMs and 80 cruise missiles.

That is, according to him, “twice-three times the quantity of similar and more powerful weaponry for the same money plus the possibility of using [the ship] anywhere in the world.”

Second, Shishkin argues for Nakhimov’s political effect. Its return will keep Russia in a “firm second place” in the world navy “table of ranks” which carries a psychological impact “no one should underrate.” Showing the flag promotes Russia as an alternative to the U.S. as the world’s lone superpower, according to him.

Nakhimov or no Nakhimov, many would argue China is the world’s second-ranked navy.

Third, the blogger maintains that reconstructing Nakhimov raises Russia’s “sense of self-worth” by showing that it can build [or rebuild] really large ships, not just patrol boats.

Fourth, he asserts that Nakhimov will be ready (2018-2019) earlier than new corvettes, frigates, and destroyers that won’t be delivered until the early 2020s.

Fifth, Shishkin says Sevmash’s work on a “first-rank” nuclear-powered ship like Nakhimov will prepare it to build aircraft carriers or to compete with Northern Wharf for destroyer contracts.

Shishkin notes that the renovation of Nakhimov costs 50 billion rubles ($1 billion), or 30 billion ($600 million) for the ship and 20 billion ($400 million) for new armaments and systems. If this is the case, that makes Steregushchiys about $200 million, Gorshkovs about $400 million, and Liders about $1 billion per unit.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 29 Jul 2015 13:24


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 29 Jul 2015 15:57

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... ol-4633108
Russian Navy receives new diesel-electric submarine Stary Oskol

28 July 2015
The Russian Navy has received a new diesel-electric submarine, Stary Oskol, strengthening its Black Sea Fleet.

Constructed at the Admiralty Shipyard in Saint Petersburg, the submarine was floated out last year.

The new submarine represents the third in a series of vessels being built under Project 636.3 as part of the navy's fleet modernisation programme.

Under the programme, the Russian Navy will receive six submarines, which will be deployed to serve the Black Sea Fleet following the successful completion of sea trials.

Features of these submarines include advanced stealth technology, extended combat range, latest inertial navigation system and the potential to strike land, surface, and underwater targets.

"The new submarine represents the third in a series of vessels being built under Project 636.3."

With an underwater speed of 20k and a cruising range of 400m, the improved variant of the Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines can patrol for 45 days with 52 on-board submariners.

In a separate development, the navy has commissioned its new corvette at the Amur Shipyards.

The Project 20380 corvette, which is named in honour of Aldar Tsydenzhapov, is the third vessel built for the Pacific fleet, KRET reported.

Constructed in collaboration with JSC Severnaya Verf shipyard, Project 20380 Steregushchy-class corvettes are the new multirole vessels, which are intended to replace the Grisha-class corvettes.

Steregushchy-class can be deployed in coastal patrol, escort and anti-submarine warfare (ASW) operations. The vessels can engage surface ships, submarines, aircraft, and shore-based targets.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: souravB, VickyAvinash and 44 guests