Indian Navy and Naval Aicraft: News

Indian Navy Chief Statement on the fire

http://www.ndtv.com/blog/show/navy-submarine-ins-sindhurakshak-catches-fire-405468

16:42 (IST) Navy chief DK Joshi on INS Sindhurakshak explosion:

Currently the submarine is sitting in 3 metres below water, portion of the hull visible at all times
Three officers and 15 sailors were on board at the time of the incident
We don't know what caused the fire
Whilst fuel, hydrogen ammunition are on board there are safeties built in
Fire is not supposed to happen but quite obviously the safety mechanisms have not functioned
Our diving teams have been able to open the main hatch
They will attempt to create 2 or 3 water tight compartment within the boat

4.50 pm: Indian Navy chief Admiral D.K. Joshi on INS Sindhurakshak explosion-

It took around two hours to douse the fire. We do not have all the answers right now.
As of now we do not know what caused the fire or the explosion.
Initially there was a smaller intensity explosion which caused a bigger explosion.
Of the crew of 3 officers 2 were married and of the 15 sailors 6 were married. We hope for the best.
From the video clips you can ascertain the intensity of explosion, we can imagine how small the reaction time was.
Fires are not supposed to happen, but obviously the safety mechanisms have not functioned.
We do not rule out the possibility of sabotage, but it seems unlikely. The inquiry board will go into detail.
You cannot lose hope till you have sighted them (on death toll).
We will release the names of those who were on board at an appropriate time.


Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/breaking-news-coverage-at-india-today-14082013/1/299424.html

I can remember 3 incident of my head where Russian Sub have had catastrophic failure there may be other which I dont recollect.

Kursk Tragedy , All Life Lost
Nerpa Tragedy , Many life Lost
Indian Navy Kilo Incident , sub lost completely many life lost.

Do Russian Submarine pay less attention to safety in design compared to Western Counterpart ?

Do Russian Training have some shortcoming when dealing with Safety & Fire issue on board submarine ?

Do Russian Weapons specifically torpedoes have a tendency to catch fire or explode compared to Western Ones ?

No Trolling need some serious answers on this

Austin wrote:Kursk Tragedy , All Life Lost
Nerpa Tragedy , Many life Lost
Indian Navy Kilo Incident , sub lost completely many life lost.

Looked up info on wiki and other sources about the other accidents that we had over the last 25 years.
I'll leave you to make your own conclusions about the things you asked about.
Personally - I see a lot of fuck-ups.

K-84 (2011), caught on fire while in dry dock in Murmansk. Fire erupted as a result of welding on the outer hull causing sparks that ignited the wooden scaffolding, which in turn ignited the sub's rubber coating. The sub was subsequently lowered into the water and the fire was eventually extinguished, with possible minor damage to a few of the sub's system aside from the destruction of the rubber coating.
No-one died thankfully
Failure of fire-safety on the part of the dock workers and flammable materials used during work on the sub.

B-414 (2006), a short-circuit caused a fire to break out in the electromechanical section of the sub while it was deployed in the Barents Sea. Automatic systems fired, shutting down the reactor and localizing the fire. The crew extinguished the fire a while later.
2 men died from Carbon Monoxide poisoning.
Failure of the electric systems or wiring.

AS-28 minisub (2005), was moving around somewhere not far from Kamchatka in the Far East, got it's propeller snagged the aerial of a hydrophone array, and also managed to get entangled in some fishing nets. It sank right to the sea-bed. The Russian Navy promptly requested international assistance and Putin ordered Ivanov to personally oversee the rescue operation. The British, Japanese and American navies sent men and equipment to assist the operation and in the end the sub was freed and surfaced when a British remote-controlled deep-water vehicle cut the lines entangling it.
No deaths, everyone surfaced alive and well
Not sure what the failure was in this time; probably just bad luck.
Positive sides are the lessons learnt by the Russian leadership from the Kursk disaster in terms of requesting assistance, successful co-ordination of rescue efforts by different navies, the high amount of attention paid to it at the highest levels of leadership, logical actions of the crew aimed at conserving oxygen and energy.

K-159 (2003), rusted old Soviet hulk that was extremely poorly maintained, was being towed to another location and kept afloat with pontoons. Sunk when one of the pontoons ripped off during a squall.
Lost with all hands onboard but one (9 died in total)
Failure of poor pontoons (not airtight), their fastening to the hull, officers overlooking the towing operation, and Admiral Suchkov who despite being woken up and notified of the incident at HQ made made no attempt to save the crew.

K-278 (1989); an experimental nuclear attack sub, a fire broke out (possibly as the result of faulty electrics) which rapidly spread via electric cables bypassing the various bulkhead doors and fireproofing, resulted in the destruction of 2 ballast tanks and their subsequent flooding, propulsion failed, when the the ballast tanks were ordered to be blown the compressed air pipe of one of the ballasts ruptured and fed the fire even more, even mixing in with flammable materials in another section and adding them to the mix too. The sub surfaced and most of the crew evacuated into the icy waters, while others stayed to fight the fire. The sub sunk again while a few men were still on-board. These crewmembers and officers boarded the escape capsule, which ejected and surfaced but only one of them managed to leave it before the capsule sank again.
42 died in total; only 4 of which died because of the actual fire and fumes.
Failure of electric system and wiring, fireproofing and materials, automatic firefighting system which failed, compressed air system connected to the ballasts which ruptured when it was supposed to do its job and the escape capsule which managed to sink itself. Some of the crew and officers were at fault too as the situation apparently wasn't handled as it was supposed to have been and there were several fatal decisions made.
The positive sides were the heroism showed by key members of the crew, very fast response by naval search and rescue which dropped life-rafts for the sailors, quick response of another vessel.

Footage of the Multiple Explosions on the (INS Sindhurakshak) Kilo Class Submarine



All 18 sailors on board are now confirmed dead . Initial reports suggest that a Torpedo went off in the Weapons Bay .

Austin wrote:I can remember 3 incident of my head where Russian Sub have had catastrophic failure there may be other which I dont recollect.

Kursk Tragedy , All Life Lost
Nerpa Tragedy , Many life Lost
Indian Navy Kilo Incident , sub lost completely many life lost.

Do Russian Submarine pay less attention to safety in design compared to Western Counterpart ?

Do Russian Training have some shortcoming when dealing with Safety & Fire issue on board submarine ?

Do Russian Weapons specifically torpedoes have a tendency to catch fire or explode compared to Western Ones ?

No Trolling need some serious answers on this

None of those 3 have much in common, so looking for a similar problem is futile.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?230046-INS-Sindhurakshak-catches-fire-at-naval-dockyard-in-Mumbai&p=6834942&viewfull=1#post6834942

Makes me sick seeing these photos.

People speculating about the explosion need to be slapped.

Have there been incidents with fatalities on NATO made boats recently?

I've heard that if the kursk sank because of an explosion by its torpedo's propellant. Does this have to do with poor maintenance or the torpedo itself. I watched a western documentary on this issue and it said the if the Kursk had  NATO made torpedos such an accident would have much lesser chances of taking place.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Have there been incidents with fatalities on NATO made boats recently?

I've heard that if the kursk sank because of an explosion by its torpedo's propellant. Does this have to do with poor maintenance or the torpedo itself. I watched a western documentary on this issue and it said the if the Kursk had  NATO made torpedos such an accident would have much lesser chances of taking place.

On the Kursk, it was possibly a Squall torpedo that caused the disaster. (Altho it could have been anything that caused it - even a collision with an American object has been suggested).

The Squall is a phenomenal torpedo. It can move at a vastly greater speed than the US, or any other equivalent eg FIVE TIMES THE SPEED, or maybe even more.

Sadly, for the early Squall, there may have been a terrible cost to this greater speed.
I am sure that the modern Squall is perfectly safe, and much better than NATO equivalents, provided proper procedures and maintenance are adhered to.

Either way, there have been a fair number of disasters on American subs (much suppressed too).
I think its much too early to speculate what caused the Indian disaster. At this stage they arent ruling out sabotage, or explosions outside the vessel. So who knows what the cause was?

Firebird wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Have there been incidents with fatalities on NATO made boats recently?

I've heard that if the kursk sank because of an explosion by its torpedo's propellant. Does this have to do with poor maintenance or the torpedo itself. I watched a western documentary on this issue and it said the if the Kursk had  NATO made torpedos such an accident would have much lesser chances of taking place.

On the Kursk, it was possibly a Squall torpedo that caused the disaster. (Altho it could have been anything that caused it - even a collision with an American object has been suggested).

The Squall is a phenomenal torpedo. It can move at a vastly greater speed than the US, or any other equivalent eg FIVE TIMES THE SPEED, or maybe even more.

The cause was leaky Type 65 torpedo..that still using peroxide fuel.

Are there any Russian torpedos proposed for production that don't use HTP?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Are there any Russian torpedos proposed for production that don't use HTP?

As i have heard, the HTP torpedoes was taken out of service.

I go along with the battery theory, but if they had a weapon explosion it means the fire or first explosion went through the whole sub. Because the batteries are located to the rear and bottom, and not under the torpedo room?

Expert on submarine fleet talked about possible causes and consequences of the accident on a submarine in India

"The fact that the explosion occurred at night in India, can attest to the fact that it was taken off the air torpedo ammunition", - told the newspaper VIEW chairman of the St. Petersburg Submariners' Club Captain 1st Rank Igor Kurdin stock. In his opinion, we should not ignore the version of the attack.


"Maybe someone wanted to spoil the party"

Igor K., what could there be? Which, perhaps, have weaknesses in boats of this series?

Igor Kurdin: Indian boat only recently was upgraded. The main advantage of this project - its simplicity, which, in turn, ensures reliability.

Anything like this before on submarines of this series did not happen. I want to remind you that we have built for themselves 24 and 20 such submarines were sent for export to different countries. In 2005, the serial order of the five boats brought us almost 75% of the profits from the export of Russian weapons. For us it is a very profitable and lucrative arms export item.

A scene on submarines at all, even the newest technology and well-trained crew is still inevitable. Another thing that one should always draw the appropriate conclusions.

What other emergency on submarines are parallels in this case?

IK: At one time, in January 1962, detonated a diesel-electric submarine B-37 at a pier in the Arctic - then the main base of the Northern Fleet submarine force. Killed more than 100 people, almost all of the crew, and even sunk two submarines stationed nearby. And still is not certain cause of the explosion of torpedo ammunition because of destruction there were such a force, which prevented reliably determine what happened. Most likely, the rules have been violated procedural works with torpedo weapons.

The fact that the explosion occurred in India at night, around midnight, and, according to witnesses, it was not even a single explosion, and four or five consecutive, can attest to the fact that it was taken off the air torpedo ammunition. And the explosion of such force leaves virtually no chance of saving the crew. I also note that the entire crew of a submarine consists of 52 people, and on board the Indian was only 18. I can say that nowhere and never carried out maintenance work with a gun at night, only during the day, when the whole crew is aboard.

Among the versions of what happened is called a hydrogen explosion when charging batteries submarine. What do you think about this?

IK: Yes, a number of experts are inclined to this version of the original causes of the explosion. Indeed, the boat was getting ready to go to sea, and it is possible that the forces of watches and electromechanical parts specialists conducted charging batteries. I will say more on my boat and was once the battery explode. But its effects were minimal in terms of destruction and loss of life. We have not lost a single sailor. So the version that subsequently led to an explosion of the torpedo explosion of ammunition, it seems to me somewhat strained.

Then what is left?

IK: In sort out the reasons for the special commission. But I note that some people express and the assumption of the attack. I think this version also has a right to exist, all the more so in India tomorrow a national holiday - Independence Day. Maybe someone wanted to spoil the holiday ...

Some have drawn parallels between the explosion and the death of the "Kursk". And there, and there torpedo bays ...

IK: Yes, unfortunately, this parallel suggests itself. Only the "Kursk" was at sea submerged, and this boat was in the tank. But I repeat the most important thing: that the cause of this explosion is catastrophic for the ship and crew.

And could the Russian experts who have upgraded it over the past few years, do something wrong?

IK: The fact that the overhaul and modernization that took place on that submarine, as you yourself said, were for a long time. Of these, no less than six months passed mooring boat, navigation, state tests, etc. took part in them, of course, and Indian sailors themselves, as well as specialists, they have attracted. This indicates that all of the comments, flaws and faults have been eliminated. And the main evidence of good status of a submarine - it's her three-month long transition from the White Sea, from Severodvinsk, around Europe, Africa, the Indian Ocean to India.

As for the Russian experts, this submarine is still in our warranty. And it is a common practice when the so-called group supervision warranty stays with the boat in India. They are there just for the fact that all these small imperfections and remove the comments, if necessary, call the contractors, etc. And as far as I know, no one has reported that on this boat there were any complaints, claims .

By the way, according to media reports, Russian experts still do not admit to the place of incident. Is this normal?

IK: First, of course, the commission, which is headed by Commander of the Indian Navy, will be to understand the state of emergency on their own. Agree, and we also do not attract foreign talent that we have something like this happens. But in this case, the Russian side has submitted a proposal to use in the commission of Representatives and the Design Bureau for Marine Engineering "Rubin", where the boat was designed, and the "Admiralty Shipyards", where it was built, and, of course, ship repair center "asterisk", where it was upgraded. We are ready to provide all possible assistance to the Indians, as this accident is not only important for the Indian Navy, but also for us in the first place. As for us, too, similar models are in service.

And what can you say about the reputational losses for Russia because of this accident?

IK: They have a place to be. And India is indeed one of the main exporters of our weapons, especially in the field of naval technology. Everyone knows that they have taken on lease for 10 years, our nuclear submarine "Nerpa", they are waiting for our aircraft carrier - the former "Admiral Gorshkov", they ordered the construction of the frigates.

Therefore, our task now - to take an active part in the analysis of the accident, identify the problem and understand what may have happened to some of the most reliable boats that are built for more than 20 years and are in service with many navies.

And I believe that our primary task is not that at all costs to prove that we are not responsible for the accident, and thoroughly understand its causes in order to ensure that this does not happen in the future. Loss of reputation, of course, important, but, in my opinion, they are secondary.

And say a few words about this series of submarines. Why is it called the common people "from Warsaw?" What kind of weapon it is completed?

IK: "Varshavyanka" her nickname because at the time we started building these submarines in the first place for us and for the countries - participants of the Warsaw Pact. These boats, as I said, are very simple to operate, not primitive, that is simple, reliable and has a good combat capabilities.

And at the center of ship repair "asterisk" she went modernization that included installation of new avionics, navigation equipment, primarily new weapons. On board the boat was blown up 14 armed torpedoes and four anti-ship missiles of the joint Russian-Indian development.

Russian Deputy PM comment on the tragedy

Rogozin: Technology is not considered as a cause of emergency with the submarine India

"The very first information was that the explosion occurred in the compartment where the battery was charging for the submarine. This is the most dangerous job, which is not so much with the manufacturers of these units, but with the safety precautions that must be maintained at a high level. Therefore, the first suspicions of our experts - is likely to safety issues. While we're on the technique do not sin, "- said Rogozin, reports RIA "Novosti" .

According to him, to seek the causes of the incident are already involved nine experts - they are now at the base of the submarine fleet in India. "And, of course, I ordered the leadership of the United Shipbuilding Corporation to send more experts in agreement with the Indian side to participate in the investigation of the tragedy and to provide full support to our Indian friends," - said Deputy Prime Minister.

He believes that the main lift, has announced a technology or human error. "But whatever the result, India - this is our leading partner in not only the purchase of military equipment ready - that is our leading partner for the future establishment of a joint creation of special military equipment. We will help India to build capacity in this business ", - assured Rogozin.

"We grieve together with our Indian friends as members of the crew were killed," - he concluded.

That was a horrifying way to die, RIP to the crew and condolences to their family.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/17/world/asia/india-submarine.html?ref=world&_r=2&

I have a feeling, that there was nothing wrong with submarine neither with missiles. I think this was human factor. They load at night and next morning was holiday. Explosion happened with last missiles, so I think, that at the end of loading they just want to finish quickly, but when you work quick, you are less careful and in a hurry, they could do something they should not do and tragedy happened.

I think this is a lesson, that you have to be same careful when you load last missile as when you load first missile and all between.

What kind of missiles explode or ignite and launch themselves into the dock when you accidentally scrape them against the hull a little, or don't fit them completely into the tube? So what if the crew were in a rush to load them? In a real crisis situation they could be woken up at 3 AM to load missiles, and would be tired and groggy and make the same sort of errors.

Yet this sort of devastation shouldn't happen anyway; there are supposed to be multiple fail-safes because its a given that such mistakes can happen especially when loading armaments.

Some serious fuck up somewhere here. It could just as easily lie at the feet of the Club-S manufacturers. Let's wait for more info.

RIP to the dead; now that it's official and the chances of any more survivors are negligible.

medo wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/17/world/asia/india-submarine.html?ref=world&_r=2&

I have a feeling, that there was nothing wrong with submarine neither with missiles. I think this was human factor. They load at night and next morning was holiday. Explosion happened with last missiles, so I think, that at the end of loading they just want to finish quickly, but when you work quick, you are less careful and in a hurry, they could do something they should not do and tragedy happened.

I think this is a lesson, that you have to be same careful when you load last missile as when you load first missile and all between.

How can that be? Missiles have safe guards, they do not explode because it isn't inserted correctly. It was a cascade failure at the fault of NPO Novator. There has always been problems with quality control of Klub missiles, now it is deadly.

iirc Klub-S missiles launched from subs have an outer layer that peels away when the missile pops out of the water.

Vladimir79 wrote:

medo wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/17/world/asia/india-submarine.html?ref=world&_r=2&

I have a feeling, that there was nothing wrong with submarine neither with missiles. I think this was human factor. They load at night and next morning was holiday. Explosion happened with last missiles, so I think, that at the end of loading they just want to finish quickly, but when you work quick, you are less careful and in a hurry, they could do something they should not do and tragedy happened.

I think this is a lesson, that you have to be same careful when you load last missile as when you load first missile and all between.

How can that be?  Missiles have safe guards, they do not explode because it isn't inserted correctly.  It was a cascade failure at the fault of NPO Novator.  There has always been problems with quality control of Klub missiles, now it is deadly.  

Yes that's certainly one possibility, but it could be the fault of the crew/officers too.
From what I understood; fail-safes or not (and there would typically be several not just one) - the missiles are not just supposed to 'explode' if they haven't been primed and armed. Or am I wrong?
So why were the missiles in this state? Or maybe the launch tubes were?

In all likelyhood it looks like the Klub-S manufacturers might be at fault in either case - it's just a question as to whether partially or completely.