Submariners practice world-class rescue skills*

The Royal Australian Navy's Submarine Force has exercised responses to the unlikely event of a submarine incident at sea, after completing an intensive four week training exercise which demonstrated the 

submarine escape and rescue capability. 

During Exercise BLACK CARRILLON 15, members of the Navy's Submarine Force transferred crew from HMAS Rankin, utilising the James Fisher Submarine Rescue System submersible, LR5. 

The exercise also involved two six-person teams escaping from a bottomed submarine using fitted submarine escape equipment. The exercise was also attended by experts from 12 different submarine operating nations.

For the first time, the exercise involved the recently acquired Defence Maritime Services operated intervention ship, MV Besant, which was able to demonstrate the significant capability it brings to submarine escape. Besant would be one of the first vessels on scene in the event a submarine crew needs to escape from the disabled submarine prior to rescue.

If the situation in the disabled submarine is stable, Besant will use on board equipment to assess the situation and develop a rescue plan enabling LR5 to commence personnel transfer from the stricken submarine almost immediately upon arriving at the scene. LR5 is currently transferred to the site utilising the larger rescue ship MV Seahorse Standard.

MV Seahorse Standard is due to be replaced by the new rescue ship MV Stoker, which is currently undergoing final fit-out and is due to join MV Besant at Fleet Base West, south of Perth, Western Australia, in 

February 2016. 

Commander Submarine Force, Captain Matt Buckley, hailed the exercise as a success. 

"During the series of exercises we were able to re-affirm that our existing capability can save lives in the unlikely event that we ever experience a submarine incident requiring the evacuation of submariners," he said.

"Key exercise outcomes were achieved, and new equipment was proven, validating the process and procedures we have in place to ensure we get the right equipment on site in a timely manner to enable personnel to evacuate a disabled submarine. 

"Exercising our organic capabilities along with continued close cooperation with international partners in submarines escape and rescue ensures that we continually refine and improve our ability to deploy the submarine rescue system. 

"This is important part of proving we have an effective and seaworthy escape and rescue system and generates confidence across the Submarine 

Enterprise," Captain Buckley said.

* Notícia publicada al web de la Royal Australian Navy. Compartim aquesta notícia per subratllar la importància de la formació del personal en qualsevol força. En el cas de les tripulacions de submarins, els exercicis de escapament/rescat ajuden també a millorar la confiança, un intangible decisiu.

Russia offers to help repair India’s Kilo class submarine*

Russia expressed willingness to help repair all of India’s Project 877 EKM (NATO reporting name Kilo) diesel-electric submarines. India has 9 such submarines, many of which are in need of repair, according to Andrey Baranov, Deputy Director of foreign trade and military-technical cooperation of the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering.
According to Baranov, Russia is ready to provide India with a program that shows the exact repair time for specific vessels. India’s Ministry of Defence is expected to offer a response, according to Itar-Tass.

Baranov recalled the accident on the Russian-made submarine INS Sindurakshak off the coast of Mumbai in August of last year. It is unclear whether the submarine can be used again, although Indian Navy sources remain optimistic.
The service life of many of India’s Project 877 EKM submarines can be extended up to ten years, according to the Rubin bureau.
Earlier it was reported that the Zvezdochka shipyard will take on the repair and modernization of the Indian Navy’s Sindukesari. Then it was reported that the financial terms had not yet been fully resolved, in order for India to avoid the sanctions imposed by the United States and the EU on the United Shipbuilding Corporation, which owns Zvezdochka.
In early August, the Indian side indicated its willingness to buy or lease two Russian Cupid class submarines. This decision was made after the failure of one naval submarine project in India, resulting in the Ministry of Defence’s subsequent unease about the state of the country's defences.
In September 2013, India said it intended to conclude a contract with Zvezdochka in 2015 - 2019 on the repair of two Project 877EKM submarines with the extension of their service life.

Since 1997, Zvezdochka has modernised five Indian diesel-electric submarines - Sinduvir, Sinduratna, Sindugosh, Sinduvijay and Sindurakshak. The enterprise also continues the repair and modernisation support of the Sindukirti submarine at its permanent base - Visakhapatnam.
Project 887EKM submarines were designed by the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering (St. Petersburg). They are designed for fighting enemy’s submarines and ships and defending naval bases, coastal and sea service lines, reconnaissance and patrolling missions.

*Notícia publicada a Russia & India Report. Més enllà dels acords concrets, aquesta notícia ens recorda la importància de gestionar els contractes de manteniment, reparacions i actualització.

Navy’s standard flies again on wreck of sunken battle-cruiser Repulse*

The White Ensign flies again on one of the most hallowed sites in Royal Navy history. Fifty-seven metres beneath the South China Sea Lt Adam Bolton admires the Royal Navy’s standard fixed to the wreck of battle-cruiser HMS Repulse, sunk by the Japanese 73 years ago

The reservist from HMS Vivid in Plymouth and fellow diver/photographer Mike Robinson fulfilled the wishes of the survivors’ association to return to the battered remains of the Repulse, one of two capital ships around which Force Z was formed in 1941 to deter Japanese aggression in the Far East.

Not only did the two vessels fail to curb Tokyo’s ambitions, but they were also pounced upon by Japanese bombers when they sailed from Singapore to attack enemy ships supporting landings on the Malay Peninsula.

After evading nearly 20 torpedoes, Repulse – which was built in WW1 and served extensively in the Mediterranean between the wars – was struck four or five times in quick succession, despite her gunners damaging or downing 15 Japanese aircraft.

After just 70 minutes of battle, the 25-year-old ship succumbed to her wounds, capsized and sank, taking more than 500 souls with her - ​just under half the ship’s company.

The Prince of Wales survived for another hour before she too tank about eight miles to the east.

In all, around 840 officers and men – including the task force commander Tom Phillips and flagship captain John Leach – lost their lives. Repulse’s captain, Bill Tennant, survived and became one of the architects of the Normandy invasion.

The wrecks of both vessels have been visited fairly regularly since being discovered by Royal Navy divers in the mid-1960s – although the Prince of Wales has generally received the bulk of the attention.

Adam and Mike made five dives on the Repulse and despite fairly poor visibility – around four metres – the duo were able to make a fairly comprehensive survey of the lost leviathan.

“Repulse is still a very imposing sight and it was a great honour to replace the Ensign on behalf of the survivors’ association,” said Adam.

“The wreck is still in good condition overall, lying on her port side in 57 metres of water. One of the 15in turrets is still facing out pointing the massive barrels up to the sky.

“The rest of the secondary armament on the port side is all visible. The seabed is littered with live ammunition – mainly pom-pom rounds and some 4in shells are clearly visible.”

Sadly, despite the sanctity of the site – both ships are protected war graves – the Repulse has suffered at the hands of ruthless salvage hunters; pre-nuclear-era steel is particularly valuable.

These scrap dealers have removed two propellers and caused substantial damage to aft, using explosives around the shafts.

All images are courtesy of Mike Robinson, Wreckferret Photography. You can see more of Mike’s haunting photography of the wreck of the Repulse at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/93805587@N03/with/14038097668/

* Notícia publicada al web de la Royal Navy. Al Regne Unit hi ha un gran respecte per als caiguts en combat, tant per part de les institucions públiques com per associacions ciutadanes. Una noble tradició que els catalans hem d'anar recuperant. També un sentit record per les tripulacions del HMS Repulse i l'HMS Prince of Wales.

The Sinking of the INS Sindhurakshak Strains Russo-Indian Military-Technical Cooperation*

By: Pavel Felgenhauer
 
A series of explosions and a deadly fire ravaged the Kilo-type (project 877EKM or Varshavyanka) 3,000-ton submarine INS Sindhurakshak on August 14 as it was moored in Mumbai harbor and preparing to sail the next day, on August 15—India’s Independence Day. Eighteen sailors are feared to have perished in the disaster. The nose of the submarine was ripped open by an explosion: It sank but did not capsize, and its “sail” or fin is still rising above the water. A sister Kilo submarine, the INS Sindhuranta, moored alongside the INS Sindhurakshak, reportedly sustained some damage as a result of the massive explosion. The Sindhurakshak was built in St. Petersburg in the late 1990s. From 2010 to 2013, the Sindhurakshak was repaired and modernized in Russia in the Zvezdochka shipyard in Severodvinsk. The Sindhurakshak sailed from Severodvinsk last January and arrived in Mumbai last April, going more than ten nautical miles using its own diesel engines (Kommersant, August 15).
 
A team of Russian specialists from the Zvezdochka shipyard was in Mumbai to service the Sindhurakshak, but none were onboard when the vessel exploded and sank. Russia is ready to help the Indians investigate the cause of the catastrophe, but, reportedly, the Indians have refused to allow Russians specialists on the scene. The Sindhurakshak sank in relatively shallow waters and can be salvaged, though the severity of the sustained damage means it will most likely go to scrap anyway (Interfax, August 15).
 
In Severodvinsk, the Sindhurakshak was refitted with new batteries, new electronic communications equipment, sonar and, most importantly, Russian-made Klub-S (SS-N-27A) cruise missiles, giving the submarine important additional capabilities to strike enemy ships and land targets at ranges of up to 300 kilometers. The refitting of the Sindhurakshak cost India some $90 million (Kommersant, August 15). According to Indian sources, the price tag of the Sindhurakshak refitting was much higher—$156 million (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/At-156m-refit-expenses-on-INS-Sindhurakshak-exceeded-original-cost/articleshow_b2/21829702.cms?prtpage=1). Four other Indian-operated Kilo-class submarines have been refitted with Klub-S cruise missiles in Russia, including the INS Sindhuranta, which was reportedly somewhat damaged by the August 14 explosion. The loss of the Sindhurakshak is a severe blow to the Indian Navy. The Indians currently have 14 submarines, including a nuclear-powered K-152 Nerpa attack submarine (INS Chakra), leased from Russia. But apparently only half of those are ready for combat at any given time.
 
The Russian press and specialists are blaming the Indian sailors for “making grave mistakes,” which sank the Sindhurakshak, a diesel-electric submarine that uses either a snorkel to suck in air, or powerful batteries to propel it while underwater. During charging, the batteries emit hydrogen, which may ignite or explode. The INS Sindhurakshak had inbuilt safety precautions to control the hydrogen problem, but Russian experts and the press stress the Sindhurakshak’s Russian-made batteries were replaced in Severodvinsk during refitting with Indian-made Exide batteries. The makers of the Klub-S missiles—the Novator Design Bureau—told Kommersant their warheads “are absolutely safe and cannot detonate accidentally because of fire or anything.” The Zvezdochka shipyard told journalists the Sindhurakshak was in good order, the renovation was fine and the shipyard had done nothing possibly wrong that could have caused the disaster (Kommersant, August 15).
 
The blame shifting in the disaster between Moscow and New Delhi may seriously strain Russo-Indian military-technical cooperation, which has already been under pressure in recent years. During the Cold War, India was a staunch Soviet ally, while its archenemies Pakistan and China were allied to the United States. India received large amounts of Russian weapons, and the shipments continued after the Soviet collapse in 1991; the overall strategic balance in Asia slowly shifted, however, with Russia becoming increasingly close to China, while, in turn, the US became friendlier with India as its ties with Beijing and Islamabad withered. Since 1989, China is forbidden to import US or European Union military hardware. Whereas, India is free to buy from any Western source, including the US. The Russian share of India’s overall arms imports declined from 75 to 40–45 percent, but the volume of import of Russian arms has stayed constant. Indian military personnel often complain about outdated Russian equipment. “The Sindhurakshak disaster may cause some hostile articles in the Indian press, but they [the criticism in the media] are anyway bankrolled by the French,” says a leading Russian expert Sergei Lunev, “This wave will recede, and the Indians will continue to buy Russian since they are often themselves to blame for disasters with military hardware” (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, August 15).
 
In the past the delivery of Russian-made ships and submarines to the Indian navy was delayed because of technical mishaps. The former Russian carrier Admiral Gorshkov was initially planned to be delivered to India in 2008, but is still today in Severodvinsk. The price of the Gorshkov refurbishing has increased from the initial $1 billion contract signed in 2004 to $2.33 billion. Last year the Gorshkov’s main engine went bust during trials in the Barents Sea (see EDM, November 30, December 7, 2012), and today Russia is hoping to finally deliver it before the end of 2013 (Kommersant, August 15).
 
India is building French-designed Scorpene submarines, equipped with air-independent propulsion systems in Mumbai to eventually replace the diesel-electric Kilos. Russia has still not mastered the production of non-nuclear air-independent propulsion submarines or torpedoes, but the assembly of the Indian Scorpenes is years behind schedule. At present New Delhi is negotiating with Moscow the possible purchase (lease) of one more nuclear submarine to add to the Nerpa (RIA Novosti, August 15).
 
The most ambitious and costly Russo-Indian military project is to build a stealth fifth generation fighter aircraft or FGFA: only on R&D India must spend some $6 billion before 2020, with Russia adding another $6 billion. India plans to procure 144 FGFA jets, for an additional $15 billion or more (RIA Novosti, October 16, 2012). The Sukhoy Corporation boasts it already has four prototype T-50 FGFAs doing fly tests and that in 2016 the T-50 will go into serial production (Interfax, March 28). But Russia still does not have the new-generation jet engines, radars or weapons to fit the hull compartments of the T-50 (RIA Novosti, April 25). Acrimony over the Sindhurakshak disaster and other Indo-Russian military-technical mishaps may undermine the Indians’ will to spend billions on the unproven FGFA; and if this project stalls, relations could further sour.

* Notícia publicada a l'Eurasia Daily Monitor de la Jamestown Foundation. Compartim aquest anàlisi per reforçar la informació sobre l'accident del INS Sindhurakshak.

Russia distances itself from India sub disaster*

Russia on Wednesday sought to guard its reputation as a supplier of military hardware by distancing itself from a deadly accident on an Indian submarine that its manufacturers had built and recently repaired.

The 2,300-tonne diesel-powered INS Sindhurakshak exploded and caught fire while docked in Mumbai early on Wednesday on the eve of India's Independence Day holiday.
The fully-loaded boat partially sank with 18 seamen on board. India's defence minister said a still-unknown number of personnel had "lost their lives in service of the country."

The incident deals a powerful blow not only to India's burgeoning naval ambitions but also to Russia's own flagging military prestige.

Moscow remains New Delhi's biggest defence partner and is keen to preserve a market it has nurtured with great care since Soviet times.

Official statistics show that eight of the 11 Project 877 submarines such as the INS Sindhurakshak Russia has built for export since the 1980s have been delivered to India.

"I do not believe that this incident will have a negative impact on Russia's military cooperation with India," the state-run RIA Novosti news agency quoted Moscow's Global Arms Trade Centre expert Igor Korotchenko as saying.

But Indian officials have voiced growing displeasure with their old partner's service - particularly concerning the cost-overruns and delays involved in the refit of a Russian aircraft carrier that now bears the name INS Vikramaditya.

Analysts believe that India is forced to continue purchasing Russian military parts because it still operates so many Soviet-era warplanes and vessels.

But New Delhi has also sought to expand its military trade ties with Washington in the past decade after remaining for so long under Moscow's care.

The US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies estimates that cumulative defence sales between New Delhi and Washington had grown "from virtually zero" 10 years ago to more than $8 billion today.

That trend has unnerved Russian officials who have already suffered humiliations from two deadly post-Soviet submarine disasters and a raft of other military and space setbacks.

The Kursk nuclear submarine tragedy claimed 118 lives when it sank in August 2008 while the Nerpa sub - eventually commissioned by India -- killed 20 Russian sailors when it caught fire while conducting exercises in November 2008.

The INS Sindhurakshak was under a Russian warranty until January 2014.

The Russian-built boat - commissioned in 1997 - underwent a refit lasting more than two years after it had caught fire in 2010 and had only left its Barents Sea repair dock at the end of January.

Russian officials were quick to report that India had voiced no complaints after receiving the submarine in April.

"There have been no claims or technical complaints," the United Shipbuilding Corporation's spokesman Alexei Kravchenko told Russian state television.

The Russian firm that refitted the submarine also stressed that the craft was fully operational when returned to India.

A spokesman for the Russian Zvyozdochka ship repair company told RIA Novosti that "certain issues" had been raised when the INS Sindhurakshak was inspected by experts at the Severodvinsk port on the Barents Sea.

The unnamed spokesman did not give further details about the nature of the issues but said they were part of the "normal working process".
 
Russia's Interfax news agency also carried a report citing an unnamed "military-diplomatic source" who claimed that the INS Sindhurakshak could have been the target of a terror plot.

"We cannot exclude the possibility that someone was trying to ruin the Indian people's main holiday - Independence Day - which is celebrated on August 14," the Russian official told the news agency.

The official speculated that the boat could not have suffered an accident while in its dock because most of its main systems would have been probably switched off. However no further evidence was given to back up the claim.

* Notícia publicada al Hindustan Times. Tot i que encara ens movem en el terreny de l'especulació ( i amb el respecte degut als mariners morts i llurs famílies), no hem de perdre de vista el progressiu realineament de l'Índia pel que fa al proveïment de material de defensa. És impossible per ara que trenqui amb Rússia com a proveïdor, però l'avenç de la recerca i les empreses índies, i la predisposició de Washington a substituïr Moscou van aplanant el camí.

Un mallorquí entre els desaparegurts del creuer naufragat*

Tot i que el govern espanyol havia anunciat a la tarda que els 177 ciutadans de l'estat que viatjaven al creuer de luxe naufragat a la costa de la Toscana, es trobaven sans i estalvis, més tard s'han donat per desapareguts tres malloquins. I ara, mentre la informació continua essent encara confusa, diverses fonts apunten que dos d'aquests tres desapareguts ja han estat localitzats. Resta desaparegut Guillermo T., un home de Palma, de 68 anys, que viatjava amb un grup de nou mallorquins, i del qual no es tenen notícies des del naufragi.

Vicente Salvador, mallorquí de 20 anys que vitajava en aquest grup de passatgers, ha explicat que van perdre la pista de Guillermo, oncle de la seva nòvia, quan intentaven abandonar el creuer. Salvador es troba ara, juntament amb els altres mallorquins, a Santo Steffano, capital del l'illa Giglio, on hi ha hagut el naufragi, a l'espera de notícies.

Les autoritats italianes han confirmat que de moment hi ha tres morts, però a mesura que han anat passant les hores --ja n'han passades més de vint-- s'ha anat confirmant el que la premsa italiana insinuava al principi amb molta prudència: hi ha desenes de desapareguts i aquest naufragi es pot convertir en una gran tragèdia. Vegeu en aquesta webcam en directe del port de l'illa com el vaixell, dins el qual no s'estima que hi hagi quedat ningú, s'acaba d'enfonsar.

El comandant, a la presó

Aquesta mateixa tarda el comandant del vaixell ha entrat a la presó després d'haver estat interrogat durant hores per la fiscalia. El comandant s'ha limitat a dir que el vaixell ha topat amb roques que no constaven a cap carta nàutica.

Amb tot, diverses fonts apunten que el vaixell s'ha desviat de la ruta, com Giorgio Fanculli, l'únic periodista a l'illa de Giglio, que gestiona el diari Giglio News, el qual ha quedat desbordat per l'allau de visites. Per Fanculli, que ha vist en directe el naufragi des de la costa, el vaixell era massa a prop de terra ferma, més que no pas habitualment. Aquest és el vaixell més gran que mai s'ha enfosat a tot el món. Era de construcció nova i comptava amb l'última tecnologia en seguretat.

Polèmica per les instruccions de la tripulació

Les causes són encara per determinar i les investiga la justícia. Però ja ha esclatat una altra polèmica. Segons diversos testimonis, la tripulació va informar d'un problema elèctric quan va marxat el corrent i després va instar els passatgers a anar als bóts salvavides per precaució. Però a partir d'aquest moment, no hi va haver cap mena d'instrucció ni es va explicar com calia deslligar les barques, cosa que va generar escenes de caos i fins i tot violència entre els passatgers i que, sempre segons els testimonis, va retardat hores l'evacuació del vaixell.

Els fets

Cap a les deu de la nit de divendres, a l'hora de sopar, el vaixell va quedar encallat, es va començar a inclinar i va marxar el corrent elèctric. Aleshores la tripulació va fer sortir els passatgers en bóts salvavides i helicòpters, però es van viure autèntiques escenes de pànic i diversos passatgers van saltar a l'aigua.

A bord hi viatjaven 3.200 passatgers, la majoria alemanys, francesos i italians, i un miler de tripulants. Els que han estat evacuats s'han allotjat en escoles i esglésies de l'illa. El vaixell havia sortit de Civitavecchia i tenia previst fer aturades a Savona, Marsella, Barcelona, Palma, Càller i Palerm. Els passatgers del nostre país que hi havia són tots fora de perill.

La companyia, Costa Cruceros, diu en un comunicat a la seva web que investiga el naufragi i que és una tragèdia que afecta profundament l'empresa.

* Notícia publicada a Vilaweb. Lamentem aquest accident, i mostrem el nostre condol amb les famílies dels morts. Esperem que es trobin tots els desapareguts.