Indian Navy News & Discussion - 22 April 2015

titash · Post by **titash** » 06 Dec 2016 08:49

Rakesh wrote:titash: I sent you PM. pls check.

Hello Admiral, I couldn't figure out how to access the PM (probably old email id). I replied to you at hotmail from new email ID. Please reply there...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 08:50

Cain Marko wrote:^Sumji does someone HAVE to be blamed?

If negligence is proven - very premature to state at this stage - then yes, blame must be assigned and the guilty party must be charged and convicted as per the provisions in the law. This is not some sailor who bought a packet of Garam Masala and thought it was a hit of Ganja. The loss of life and property is significant.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 08:53

titash wrote:Hello Admiral, I couldn't figure out how to access the PM (probably old email id). I replied to you at hotmail from new email ID. Please reply there...

Saar, please go to the top right hand corner of BR forum and right next to your name, you will see a mail icon. Click on that and you should see the PM.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 09:11

To add insult to injury - if the article below is true - INS Betwa just finished her refit. She was awarded the most spirited ship of 2016.

Indian Navy Warship Suffers Massive Damage, Two Missing

https://goo.gl/3IkQwJ

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 09:15

We may have lost her

After accident, INS Betwa may not set sail again
https://goo.gl/ADv45h

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 09:18

Singha wrote:they might pour in more water into the dock to increase buoyancy and try to put in inflatable bladders under parts of the hull to lift things by a few inches for fat slings to pass under it. then a delicate dance of multiple gantry cranes lifting it up...the dockside cranes there are probably way too small and unstable for a load like the whole ship. but there are floating cranes out there which might be rented in.

Yes this is the sort of thing that will be done. The actual damage can only be assessed after it is set upright and speculation now would be ideal only as a poll or as bets placed now to be redeemed when we have more information.

In fact it occurs to me that betting, though illegal in India is a gentlemanly way of agreeing to disagree while postponing the final judgement until more information is available.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 09:23

If the ship has fallen from a height that appear in the image below - ie equal to the beam/width of the ship - it is finished

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 06 Dec 2016 09:48

A scathing one from Bharat Karnad. The article lists 18 incidents from 2010.
Indian Navy going down the way of the other two Armed Services

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Dec 2016 09:55

shiv wrote:If the ship has fallen from a height that appear in the image below - ie equal to the beam/width of the ship - it is finished

Which is the missile boat besides the ship ? Going through some upgrades there ? Can see partially the Oto 76 mm gun

vina · Post by **vina** » 06 Dec 2016 10:34

Singha wrote:they might pour in more water into the dock to increase buoyancy and try to put in inflatable bladders under parts of the hull to lift things by a few inches for fat slings to pass under it. then a delicate dance of multiple gantry cranes lifting it up...the dockside cranes there are probably way too small and unstable for a load like the whole ship. but there are floating cranes out there which might be rented in.

1. The hull is not watertight anymore.You flood the dock, the ship will not float, but rather sink like a stone.

2. The limits of a crane are 1) Max wt it can lift and the 2) The "arm" /"length" at which it can lift it. Now , typically the largest cranes in the world are ship building gantry cranes ( a good sized on in the old days used to max out at 1000 tons), maybe they are bigger now. As a repair Naval dockyard, the dock wont have those cranes. And in any case, the ship is 4000 tons.

3. these puppies can do the jobv. No they CANT. The dock is not parallel to the waterfront, but perpendicular to it. The barge cranes need to get all their booms together in a parallel to do the kind of lift which you are talking about.

4. Any option of lifting the ship and placing it upright is out of question

5.The only option left is to jack the ship upright using multiple hydraulic jacks (think multiple car jacks, being operated in parallel). Trouble is, the moment you do it and put the ship on the keel. It is not going to be easy, will need very careful planning, analysis and execution, but that is the only way out. But seeing how close the keel is to the side of the dock, I doubt even levering it upright is possible within that limited clearance.

6. My submission is that the ship CANNOT be made upright. The thing remaining is to cut it up.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 10:42

vina wrote: 1. The hull is not watertight anymore.You flood the dock, the ship will not float, but rather sink like a stone.
.

All ships have watertight compartments - but they intercommunicate until the doors are closed. Assuming the doors can be closed (or are already closed) - the whole ship will not fill with water if the place is flooded. IMO

5.The only option left is to jack the ship upright using multiple hydraulic jacks (think multiple car jacks, being operated in parallel). Trouble is, the moment you do it and put the ship on the keel. It is not going to be easy, will need very careful planning, analysis and execution, but that is the only way out. But seeing how close the keel is to the side of the dock, I doubt even levering it upright is possible within that limited clearance.

it will not be put on its keel - initially. It will be jacked up a few inches, supports added, jacked up more, new supports added, old one removed etc. Think Auto drivers changing tyre by tilting and adding rocks

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Dec 2016 10:54

Divers will have to check for the condition of the parts of the ship below the water Lin compartment by compartment and then report. Only the n a decision on the method of refloating can be made.

But the loss of the ship along with 2 men is a kick in the gut.

That too in the dock.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 11:04

Pratyush wrote:Divers will have to check for the condition of the parts of the ship below the water Lin compartment by compartment and then report. Only the n a decision on the method of refloating can be made.

But the loss of the ship along with 2 men is a kick in the gut.

That too in the dock.

From the looks of it there's not much of it underwater and what is there can probably be drained out - but they will have to enter doors sideways and walk on the walls

vina · Post by **vina** » 06 Dec 2016 11:30

shiv wrote:All ships have watertight compartments - but they intercommunicate until the doors are closed. Assuming the doors can be closed (or are already closed) - the whole ship will not fill with water if the place is flooded. IMO

The designed damage tolerance is not infinite. Typically if one transverse bulkhead is breached (i.e. two adjacent compartments fill with water) , the ship floats as per design with lowered freeboard. Not if more than one bulkhead is breached , it sinks. The stem (nose) of the ship is narrower than the middle sections and the stern. You would expect that you will see empty space under the stem of a ship on it's side. Now the stem is lying FLAT on the ground. It looks like that the entire port side of the ship has been crushed flat like a chappati. I am willing to bet that the majority of the bulkheads of the ship are breached.

From the looks of it , going by the pictures posted , the probability of what you hope happened (i.e. just one bulkhead breached) is LOWER than someone on ECMO after suffering a cardiac arrest recovering and running a marathon. I doubt it is happening.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 06 Dec 2016 12:31

Hakeem,

The ship did not fall down from anywhere. It was on its keel, and went from vertical to horizontal as the water started filling in.

Vina,

When the Costa Concordia was being salvaged, I had read about a few techniques to erect a ship. They are easily Google-able.

Yes, if the ship fell to its side on hard concrete many things may have been jarred out of their foundations. But, we don't know how much water was already there in the dock. We know it was being flooded when the mishap happened. Perhaps there was enough to have cushioned the fall.

Ofcourse a lot of the electrical and electronics stuff would be lost. A complete write off, I don't know. Let's hold on to our horses. We will know soon.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Dec 2016 13:30

I'll make a short post since I'm in the middle of work.

Vina - it'll do you a whole lot good if you did some basic research before you post.

INS Vindhyagiri was salvaged, repaired and floating on her own as shown in the photo. You can see the scaffolding where the funnel is being painted. The gun turret and other parts of the superstructure show completed painting.

INS Vindhyagiri in full commission with two towed torpedo decoys in the stern http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/pho ... id=2026298

Note INS Dunagiri adjacent fitted with radar reflector screen for use as a target.

The ship in dry dock can be jacked up while fresh blocks can be placed underneath. The cranes can assist and dont need to lift it out completely - its like lifting the side of a bed in our house and placing a block under it.

Thereafter the structural damage can be assessed and repair.

If you visit Naval Dockyard Mumbai, you'll find INS Sindhurakshak with a new coat of paint.

A pontoon was placed under it and then floated up as shown below

This is a photo of INS Shankush in refit at MDL on a similar pontoon. (before people start speculating - nothing ever happened to it)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/S ... +refit.jpg

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Dec 2016 13:36

INS Agray triggered a torpedo homing head that had hangfired from another ship and was badly holed. Here she is today

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2016 13:54

tough old dogs ships in general seem to be.

is the sindhurakshak going to be put back in service ?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Dec 2016 14:12

Singha wrote:is the sindhurakshak going to be put back in service ?

The assessment is still ongoing. The internal structure is sound - except where the explosion happened. The engines and electronics need replacement but Russian equipment is cheap, in production, and anyways require frequent replacement because of low TBO, and most importantly, Russians design philosophy caters for ease of maintenance, refit & overhaul. Which is why Agray's rebuild was possible. And we manufacture USHUS sonar, Porpoise ESM and other electronics.

Singha wrote:tough old dogs ships in general seem to be.

People forget in WW2 ships blasted at Pearl Harbour were rebuilt and later served at Surigao Straits & Normandy. Those holed in Alexandria supported Sicily & Salerno landings.

BTW HMS Valiant had a similar scrape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Valiant_%281914%29

In 1944, she was sent to the Far East to join the Eastern Fleet. There she took part in raids against Japanese bases in Indonesia. On 8 August 1944, she was severely damaged in an accident with the floating drydock at Trincomalee, Ceylon. The drydock was being raised with Valiant in it by pumping water from ballast tanks. The tanks were emptied in the wrong sequence for Valiant's weight distribution, which was exacerbated by her full munitions load. As a result, the drydock was over-stressed at its ends, broke its back and sank. Valiant's two inner screws were jammed as well as one of her rudders. Valiant had remained in steam and was able to avoid worse damage or sinking.[16] After the incident, the responsible Naval Constructor was disciplined.[17]

It was decided to sail her to Alexandria, where there were suitable docking facilities, However she could not steer a straight course, and could not make more than 8 knots (15 km/h). She got as far as Suez Bay, but could not attempt the Suez Canal in that condition. Lt Cmdr Peter Keeble, an experienced diver and salvage expert, personally supervised the removal of her two inner screw shafts near the gland. The A-brackets holding the shafts and screws were also cut, dropping both screws and shafts to the bottom. Keeble had perfected available underwater cutting torches by combining British and Italian technology to cut away the thick propeller shafts.[18]

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Dec 2016 14:30

vina wrote:Ships in many ways are like whales structurally. They are supported by water all along the hull. They are not designed to rest on their sides on a few points like the ship is doing. Same thing that happens when a whale gets beached will happen. The whale's, rib cage and stuff gets crushed and it dies (though it is air breathing). Exact same thing happens to the ships structures

Then why are these ships still standing?

Amphibious ships regularly beach themselves at low tide and float out at high tide.

Note the private yacht at right - tour operators often bring tourists to watch the spectacle unless shooed away by Coast Guard.

Ships run aground all the time, like the TFTA USS Port Royal

When the tide runs out, the ship's structure was perfectly able to take its weight, before tugs pulled it out.

It all depends on how the ship is stuck and the state of its buoyancy.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 14:36

vina wrote:
From the looks of it , going by the pictures posted , the probability of what you hope happened (i.e. just one bulkhead breached) is LOWER than someone on ECMO after suffering a cardiac arrest recovering and running a marathon. I doubt it is happening.

Well you did say:

vina wrote:My submission is that the ship CANNOT be made upright. The thing remaining is to cut it up.

My submission is different from yours. I will wait and see. We can get back to our respective submissions after we know what actually happens.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 14:42

Indranil wrote:Hakeem,
The ship did not fall down from anywhere. It was on its keel, and went from vertical to horizontal as the water started filling in.

Ah there's hope then..

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 06 Dec 2016 14:46

Really appreciate your posts on the subject tsarkarji.

Makes for good reading amongst wiki ship construction theorey posts.

@ all,
I take great pride in being a member of BR and do actually believe in being a step ahead of the"curve".

The commentary post this tragic accident is anything but.
I'd like to exhort posters to stop for a moment, introspect and take a call if they want such posts to be the "new normal".

Titashji made an excellent post about quality and safety.
Some here are having trouble with the quality of their postings and won't do anything about it.
Decorum used to be a thing.if we so decide, it still can be.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Dec 2016 14:49

A miserable accident.I wouldn't like to be in the shoes of the Cmde.Dockyard.Such an accident should never have happened. Fires are common,even globally,understandable as there is so much of flammable material during a refit or repair job.I can't recall anything similar happening in another navy.

The damage would've been extensive esp to sensors,etc.Whether her key eqpt., engines and machinery haven't come off their mountings is another worry.Hull damage can be repaired.Coming just after Navy Day,this fiasco is deplorable.BK is spot on.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Dec 2016 14:58

In the Honda Point Disaster in 1923, Uncle grounded 7 destroyers permanently plus 2 barely in one go

http://www.hazegray.org/features/honda/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Point_disaster

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 15:08

Singha wrote:tough old dogs ships in general seem to be.

I am guessing that apart from armour plating ships in general are somewhat resistant to lateral compression - that is to say - by design they have a degree of "springiness" that allows them to be lifted out of the water and then slam down and sink 20 meters in heavy seas. The structural integrity in warships should be able to take the compression wave of at least some explosions going off next to the hull. So they are not eggshells. Whales are not eggshells either - their ribs don't break on land - they stay alive and breathing till dehydration and exhaustion kills them. After all those guys can stand compression down to 500 plus meters and still leap out of the water and fall bang on the surface.

Meanwhile here is the abstract of a paid paper - I am not buying - just quoting
Different Methods of Refloating a Ship

In the shipping industry it is vital for a ships construction to take into consideration any grounding event that might occur, due to the fact that grounding has been representing an important issue in the maritime industry being almost always connected to a catastrophic pollution of the marine environment.

Here's more info
http://www.daaam.info/Downloads/Pdfs/pr ... miatal.pdf

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 15:08

Salvage of Pearl Harbour ships
https://padresteve.com/2013/12/09/salva ... rl-harbor/

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 06 Dec 2016 16:04

it is interesting that despite multiple accidents in this place, no one has used the 'sabotage' word.
Similarly, rarely is 'sabotage' used for the IAF crashes or ammunition dump fires. How is this S-word ruled out with such definitiveness.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 16:09

AdityaM wrote:it is interesting that despite multiple accidents in this place, no one has used the 'sabotage' word.
Similarly, rarely is 'sabotage' used for the IAF crashes or ammunition dump fires. How is this S-word ruled out with such definitiveness.

No one reaches conclusions before enquiry.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 06 Dec 2016 16:12

^ Not that i favour conspiracy theories...but have their been cases of sabotage found in past Naval accidents (or IAF/IA accidents)?

very unlike rail accidents, where sabotage is always amongst the top 3 reasons that are propounded.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 16:39

AdityaM wrote:^ Not that i favour conspiracy theories...but have their been cases of sabotage found in past Naval accidents (or IAF/IA accidents)?

very unlike rail accidents, where sabotage is always amongst the top 3 reasons that are propounded.

In general (I am happy about it) the armed forces operate like medical specialists rather than like Pakis. I mean that when "sabotage" is pinned down as a cause immediately (as in RAW/CIA/Jewish conspiracy) it takes the weight of responsibility away from everything else and may absolve incompetents or some other avoidable failure

vina · Post by **vina** » 06 Dec 2016 17:13

Hmm. As I see it from the pictures posted.
0. ~~The ship cannot be lifted and placed upright~~. There is no crane capacity for that, ~~nor can a floating crane come close enough to do it~~, okay, if they can get a floating crane with enough capacity to come INSIDE the dock , they can possibly lift it. So yes, that possibility exists.

1. The ship cannot be made upright with jacks / rope & tackle and uprighting the ship with it's keel as pivot and rotating as it is lying. The ship is lying too close to the edge of the dock and there is no clearance.

2. The first order will be to move the ship closer to the centre / other edge of the dock, so that there is enough clearance

3. The ship can be then be made upright by jacking with rope & tackle and rotating it.

4. To me it looks like the port side of the boat is crushed, definitely in the stem. Otherwise, with the width of the boat being 14m, there should be 7m of water in the dock, since the water reaches up to the centreline of the forecastle. However, since there will be a flare in the bow, if there was 7m of water, the keel bottom wont be above water like in the picture. It definitely looks like the port side is crushed flat along the length of the ship, atleast most definitely in the fore.

5. Most machinery the port is already dunked in water and probably beyond repair. The mast and bridge are smashed. The heavy turbines, boilers and gearboxes are probably ripped from their mountings.

6. The hull is damaged beyond economical repair. Even if they re float it (to clear the dock) , it is kaput. It will go the Alang or wherever to get taken apart for scrap. This is not case of ship settling in the bottom on it's keel like Vindhyagiri or a ship running aground on a sand bar / reef. The ship has been damaged in it's structurally weakest point (i.e., the girder strength is weakest in the transverse direction). I would not be surprised if the ship has not cracked apart and is lying broken in two.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 19:31

Regarding depth of water: 2 more images

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 19:39

One more

Bishwa · Post by **Bishwa** » 06 Dec 2016 19:41

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/navy-pla ... topstories

Some points
1) sea-water ingress into its engine room.
2) 10 per cent of the weaponry that is installed on the warship was actually onboard.
3) the Navy is confident that the ship will be set upright though the process of repairing and making her battle-ready could take up to two years.
4) The mast of the ship which contains crucial sensors was shorn off the vessel yesterday and major damage is expected on its surface which is resting on its side.
5) In January, 2011, the frigate INS Vindhyagiri sank at her berth after a major collision. She was raised only to be sailed out and used as target practice.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2016 21:40

>> two years

I feel like a experienced naval architect after predicting this correctly.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 22:02

Singha Boss: I don't know what kind of work you do (please don't answer that), but your posts are like fantasies. I love reading them. If the armed forces had even half of what you advocate on BRF, we would be awesome

tsarkar saar: thank you for those informative posts. I thought she was gone, but I have some hope after reading your posts.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 22:09

tsarkar wrote:The assessment is still ongoing. The internal structure is sound - except where the explosion happened. The engines and electronics need replacement but Russian equipment is cheap, in production, and anyways require frequent replacement because of low TBO, and most importantly, Russians design philosophy caters for ease of maintenance, refit & overhaul. Which is why Agray's rebuild was possible. And we manufacture USHUS sonar, Porpoise ESM and other electronics.

Saar, I am assuming you are referring to the bulkheads when you state the internal structure is sound. Now in the torpedo room where the explosion happened, the bulkheads are definitely warped or damaged beyond repair. Thus an entire new front end will have to put in right? My other question is how will the vessel manage diving and surfacing with a new front end and an older back end? I don't know, so I am asking. will the structural rigidity still be the same?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 22:15

Rakesh wrote:My other question is how will the vessel manage diving and surfacing with a new front end and an older back end?

Rakesh V!agra creates a new front end for an old back end - just sayin..

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 22:20

Bishwa wrote:3) the Navy is confident that the ship will be set upright though the process of repairing and making her battle-ready could take up to two years.

Thank you Bishwa for posting this. So the navy has spoken. She is salvageable and will be battle worthy again. The End.