NAVY NEWS WEEK 48-2

26 November 2018

Made in India Fast Patrol Vessel launched by GRSE in Kolkata By: FE Online | Updated: November 23, 2018 3:44 PM Two Fast Patrol Vessel (FPV) ships for Indian Coast Guard were simultaneously launched on Thursday at the defence PSU and warship builder - Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) Ltd. at Kolkata.

Made in India Fast Patrol Vessel launched by GRSE in Kolkata

Two Fast Patrol Vessel (FPV) ships for Indian Coast Guard were simultaneously launched on Thursday at the defence PSU and warship builder – Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) Ltd. at Kolkata. These FPV ships are each 50M long, 7.5M wide with a displacement of around 308 tons and are designed for a maximum speed of 34 knots with an endurance of more than 1500 nautical miles. According to Rear Admiral VK Saxena, Chairman and Managing Director, GRSE, “The FPV designs, exclusive to GRSE, are an improvisation on the Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPV) built by the Shipyard for the Indian Coast Guard, few years ago.” “The vessels come with an efficient hull form developed in-house and proved after extensive model testing. These are fuel efficient and the powerful platforms are well suited for patrolling, anti-smuggling, and anti-poaching and rescue operations.” These come fitted with state-of-the-art Main Engines with Advanced Control Systems and Water Jet Units and an ‘Integrated Bridge System’ assimilating all Communication and Navigation Systems. The key armament of a 40/60 Gun and improved habitability features with fully air conditioned modular accommodation for 35 personnel are the other salient features of the ships. With the launch now over the company is gearing up for the post launch activities which include balance fitting out of the ship, readiness of ship systems and setting to work of equipment / systems. Once over, the ships would be put to sea for trials before final delivery, the CMD added. These Vessels, ICGS Amrit Kaur and ICGS Kamla Devi are third and fourth in the series of five FPVs built by GRSE for the Indian Coast Guard. Upholding the best of maritime traditions, the ships were “Launched” by Veena Naravane, wife of Lt Gen Manoj Mukund Naravane, General Officer Commanding-In-Chief; Eastern Command, Indian Army. The ceremony was held in the presence of Rear Admiral VK Saxena, CMD, GRSE, and other Senior Officials of GRSE, Indian Coast Guard, Indian Navy, and Indian Army. As part of Make in India initiatives, through indigenisation efforts, GRSE has made commendable progress by successfully incorporating a high percentage of indigenous content in the ships made in shipyard. INS Kamorta and INS Kadmatt, the first two of Class of 4 ASW Corvettes became the first warships built in the country with indigenously developed warship grade steel, thus having the distinction of achieving over 90 % indigenous content and hence a major step towards achieving self reliance in state of the art warship design and construction space. On the Landing Craft Utility (LCU) class of ships delivered so far, almost 90% indigenous equipment fit has been achieved. Also, 70 % indigenous content in construction of four follow on WJFACs and 72 % indigenisation of the Railless Helo Traversing System on board 3rd ASW Corvette, INS Kiltan, have been achieved at the shipyard. To its credit in over five decades the shipyard has successfully developed an array of world-class platforms including frigates, missile corvettes, anti submarine warfare corvettes and LCU ships for the Indian Navy, all of them armed with high-tech infrastructure. It has the capacity to construct 20 ships in tandem. With the keel-laying of the 1st Advanced Stealth Frigate of P17A Project, it has once again touched a key milestone. It has also bagged orders for four Survey Vessels (Large) for Indian Navy on competitive basis and emerged a successful bidder through competition for 8 ASWSWCs, with private players active in the fray. Source: https://www.financialexpress.com The Indian political will to do this, is something to be admired.

Meet Paket: The Russian Navy's Latest Weapon (To Hunt Submarines and Torpedoes) Paket is a naval weapon consisting of an integrated central control system, a “hydroacoustic station” for sonar target detection, and a launcher equipped with anti-submarine MTT torpedoes as well as heat-seeking M-15 anti- torpedoes. by Mark Episkopos November 24, 2018

Image: Creative Commons.

Against the backdrop of escalating Russia- NATO military tensions, Russia’s Ministry of Defense has equipped yet another one of its Steregushchiy-class corvettes with the navy’s latest anti-submarine/anti- torpedo system in preparation for the Baltic Fleet’s November military exercise. The vessel, Boiky, is the third corvette to be commissioned as part of Russia’s latest Steregushchiy-class series. It is preceded by Steregushchiy and Soobrazitelnyy, and is one of thirteen Steregushchiy-class vessels to be commissioned through 2021. It’s not particularly surprising that Russia would start replacing its aging 1970’s Grisha class ships, but what should raise concern among western observers is the speed with which these new vessels are being armed with Russia’s formidable Paket-E/NK anti-submarine/anti-torpedo system . Paket is a naval weapon consisting of an integrated central control system, a “hydroacoustic station” for sonar target detection, and a launcher equipped with anti-submarine MTT torpedoes as well as heat-seeking M-15 anti-torpedoes. Paket’s MTT torpedoes and M-15 anti- torpedoes are similar in size, can be varied in quantity before each deployment, and boast effective ranges of up to 10,000 and 100-800 meters respectively. Russia’s agency of defense exports (Rosoboronexport) claims that “warships equipped with such systems have their anti-torpedo defence effectiveness augmented 3-3.5 times,” though their comparison baseline is unclear. Also unclear is how much the entire system costs to produce, but Rosoboronexport’s apparent willingness to sell Paket by its individual components may give them additional leverage in export negotiations. Paket offers drastic range and targeting improvements over the old Soviet RBU anti-submarine rocket-launcher system, but its long-term advantage lies in its modularity. That is, Paket’s constituent parts are designed to be individually upgradable without any overarching alterations; it is aptly named, in that “Paket” is Russian for “bundle.” How, then, does Paket stack up against its competitors? Given its versatility and dual offensive-defense capability, there are no direct parallels to Paket as a unified system. There are, however, similar concepts worth considering. The US Surface Ship Torpedo Defense (SSTD) system presents the closest analogy in that it combines an acoustic sensor and control processor with a Countermeasure Anti- Torpedo missile (CAT). However, it doesn’t integrate an anti-submarine solution in the same launcher. India’s Mareech Advanced Torpedo Defence System (ATDS) combines torpedo detection with indirect torpedo countermeasures, and also has no integrated anti-submarine technology. Germany’s SeaSpider Anti-Torpedo Torpedo (ATT) is an anti-torpedo missile with an advanced solid-state guidance system, reportedly compatible with a wide array of launchers. But as of 2016, SeaSpider has encountered technical hurdles late in its development and is reportedly undergoing a significant redesign. To date, all five operational Steregushchiy-class corvettes have been equipped with Paket. It is unclear when or to whom the Russia plans to sell Paket, but they may focus on installing it in the eight remaining Steregushchiy vessels before signing any major export deals. Paket is purportedly compatible with a wide range of frigates and carriers, but future installation plans beyond the Steregushchiy line have not yet been revealed. It is premature to conclude that Russia is commiting to Paket as its be-all and end-all naval weapon. Last year, Russian defense company Rostec announced that it seeks to modernize the RPK-8 anti-Submarine system with its 90R1 rockets. Nonetheless, it is clear that the Russian navy sees Paket as a fruitful platform for long-term investment and development. Paket is a capable and versatile weapons system that, with its multipurpose launcher, can further muddle the distinction between offense and defense as Russia holds ever-larger military exercises in the context of an ongoing Russia-NATO military buildup on the Baltic Sea. Mark Episkopos is a frequent contributor toThe National Interest and serves as research assistant at the Center for the National Interest. Mark is also a PhD student in History at American University. Source: https://nationalinterest.org

Costly Raising of Argentine Submarine May Not Yield Answers or Bodies, Experts Say By Daniel Politi Nov. 24, 2018 MAR DEL PLATA, Argentina — An Argentine submarine found deep on the ocean floor a year after it vanished with 44 people on board may rest there despite pleas from family members of the crew, who hope for a salvage operation that experts say would be costly and unlikely to yield new information. Experts say the salvage operation appears to be feasible. But the financially struggling administration of President Mauricio Macri is not eager to pay for it despite pressure from families who want to recover the bodies of their loved ones. For now, the only official in a position to order the vessel to be lifted quickly does not seem in a hurry to do so. Marta Yáñez, the federal judge who is in charge of the investigation into the sinking of the submarine, the San Juan, is working with experts to review 67,000 photographs and videos of the submarine and its surroundings to determine what exactly happened to the vessel. But it is unclear how long the review could take, she said. Those images are to be provided by the end of the month by Ocean Infinity, the Houston-based company that found the San Juan a week ago. If they don’t provide a clear explanation and if it appears her investigation would be helped by studying the sub itself, Judge Yáñez could order a feasibility study to find if the San Juan could be lifted from the seabed.

Mirta Laz, 70, the mother of a crew member, Alberto Sánchez, earlier this week outside the naval base in Mar del Plata.CreditCreditErica Canepa for The New York Times

The judge has made clear she would order it pulled up only if it helped the investigation, not for any other reason. “We’re all going to have to be patient,” said Judge Yáñez in a phone interview from her courthouse in Caleta Olivia in the southern province of Santa Cruz. Among the relatives of the submarine’s crew members, who have been waiting more than a year for news of their loved ones, patience is in short supply. “The judge is very slow,” complained Natalia Toconás, 33, whose brother, Mario Armando Toconás, was aboard the San Juan. “It’s going to be up to us to pressure her to act.” The demand for the vessel’s salvage is a new chapter in the families’ long battle with officials for answers.

Images of the wreckage of the San Juan.CreditArgentine Navy

Many family members believe the Argentine government would have never hired Ocean Infinity, promising a $7.5 million payout if the submarine was found, if it had not been for the pressure they exerted, including camping outside the presidential palace in Buenos Aires for almost two months. “If you don’t fight, no one does anything for you,” explained Alejandra Aguilera, 43, who is also a sister of Mr. Toconás. “Now we are going after the judge.” Some family members have filmed a video calling on Judge Yáñez to order the lifting of the San Juan, which they plan to release once she receives the images from Ocean Infinity. Mirta Laz, 70, the mother of another crew member, Alberto Sánchez, was one of approximately two dozen family members who gathered this past week outside the naval base in Mar del Plata, a coastal city that was the base of the San Juan, to demand that the submarine be lifted. “This is just getting started,” she said. “We finally know where it is. We need to go get it.” Not all family members agree. Luis Tagliapietra, who is the father of Alejandro Tagliapietra, was aboard the Ocean Infinity-operated search vessel as one of four auditors representing family members when the San Juan was found. Running such a huge operation to pull up the submarine made no sense to him, he said. “He was a sailor, he loved the sea,” Mr. Tagliapietra said of his son. Defense Minister Oscar Aguad is also moving to tamp down expectations of a salvage operation, telling the Clarín newspaper that because of the depth of almost 3,000 feet and “where it is located, it is a technologically impossible mission.” Experts, however, disagree. A salvage operation would not be simple or cheap, but there’s no reason to believe it couldn’t be done. Whether it is worthwhile though is another matter, they said. “There are many operations that were perceived to be close to impossible” before they were carried out successfully, said Richard Janssen, managing director of SMIT Salvage, a subsidiary of the Dutch company Boskalis. SMIT was one of the two companies responsible for raising the Kursk, a Russian nuclear-powered submarine that sank in the Barents Sea in August 2000 with 118 crew members aboard. That submarine was 380 feet below the surface of the water, compared with almost 3,000 feet for the San Juan, but it was also eight times larger. While the Kursk’s raising is often mentioned as an example of what a San Juan salvage operation might resemble, efforts to salvage wrecks from deeper depths give a better sense of the chances of the Argentine submarine’s recovery. SMIT, for example, recovered the Japanese vessel Ehime Maru in one piece from a depth of around 2,000 feet off the Hawaiian coast in 2001. Considering how much technology has improved since then, going an additional 1,000 feet down to reach the San Juan should not be seen as prohibitive, as that depth is nothing out of the ordinary in oil and gas exploration, Mr. Janssen said. Also, the San Juan would hardly be the deepest salvage ever undertaken. The C.I.A. — with the help of the billionaire Howard Hughes — carried out a Cold War-era operation to recover parts from a Soviet submarine that in 1968 sunk three miles deep in the Pacific. Stewart Little, who runs the Submarine Rescue Consultancy and worked with submarines for more than 30 years in the British Royal Navy, said technical issues were not the problem. “Is it feasible?” Mr. Little said. “Yes. Is it too deep? No. It’s just the financing that would be an issue.” Although the operation’s potential cost is difficult to assess without detailed information about the seabed and the state of the submarine, Mr. Little estimated that any salvage effort would have to start with a budget of about $100 million. The real question that must be answered before an operation is begun, experts said, is why. “Considering the San Juan imploded, there may not be much in the way of remains inside and even if there are, it likely won’t be all of them,” said Neil Hopkins, who worked at the British Defense Ministry for 30 years as a civil engineer specializing in submarine design and construction. He now runs Sonistics, a company that specializes in submarine rescues. If the submarine is raised, he said, “Do you say to 44 families, we can identify 14 of them but not the other 30?” One reason to spend money salvaging the vessel would be to get information to prevent future accidents, but considering the age of the San Juan, within five years that information would not be relevant to any other submarine in operation, and the whole effort would be “an academic exercise with no practical value,” Mr. Little said. As an alternative to salvaging, the Argentine Navy could designate the submarine a grave and come up with a plan to take the families to the site once a year so they could pay their respects, Mr. Hopkins suggested. Source: https://www.nytimes.com The Argentinian government is under huge pressure due to high level of expectation. The latter has also been caused by the Argentinian Navy’s indecisive steps taken initially. Another question arises is whether Argentine has $100 million (likely more) to spend on this operation, which may not produce definitive result, as the country has extreme financial challenges.

Deadly collisions prompt new sleep policy on Navy carriers Posted 5:17 pm, November 24, 2018, by AP Wire

The guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain (R), with a hole on its portside after a collision with an oil tanker, is escorted by Singapore Navy RSS Intrepid (L) to Changi naval base in Singapore on August 21, 2017. (Photo credit ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

NORFOLK, Va. — The U.S. Navy has changed its policy to allow all sailors working on aircraft carriers to get eight hours of uninterrupted sleep. The Virginian-Pilot reported Thursday that the change is a reaction to two fatal ship collisions that killed 17 crew members in the Pacific Ocean last year. The Navy found that fatigue and poor sleep management contributed to the collisions. The USS John S. McCain and an oil tanker collided near Singapore in August 2017, killing 10 sailors. The USS Fitzgerald and a container ship collided off Japan in June 2017, killing seven sailors. Both of the Navy ships were guided missile destroyers. The policy change was made in August. It was first reported by the Navy Times. Source: https://fox4kc.com

How History Proves Cheap Diesel Submarines Can Take on Any Navy The Royal Navy, for its part, expended hundreds of expensive antisubmarine munitions and dispatched 2,253 helicopter sorties chasing false contacts—without detecting the San Luis on either occasion it closed within firing range. The brief but bloody naval war that occurred in 1982 over the Falkland Islands, known as the Malvinas in Argentina, is typically viewed as a triumph of British naval power. A Royal Navy task force managed to beat off heavy air attacks to take back the South Atlantic archipelago from Argentine troops. For most of the war, a lone Argentine diesel submarine, the San Luis, opposed the Royal Navy at sea. Not only did the San Luis return home unscratched by the more than two hundred antisubmarine munitions fired by British warships and helicopter, but it twice ambushed antisubmarine frigates. Had the weapons functioned as intended, the British victory might have been bought at a much higher cost. Argentina’s ruling military junta seized the disputed Falkland Islands opportunistically in order to score political points at home. Not expecting a real war, the junta miscalculated how quickly British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher would escalate against their use of force with her own. This lack of planning was manifest in the unpreparedness of the Argentine Navy’s submarine fleet. One was in such decrepit condition it could not safely submerge, while the more modern Salta was undergoing repairs. The older Santa Fe inserted frogmen to assist in the initial invasion on April 2. It was not until the following day that the most modern available sub, the San Luis, received orders at its dock at Mar de Plata to depart on a combat patrol around the area of the Malvinas. The San Luis was a German Type 209 diesel submarine built in large numbers to serve as a smaller, cost- efficient submarine for less wealthy countries. Displacing just 1,200 tons with a crew complement of thirty-six, the San Luis carried fourteen Mark 37 antisubmarine torpedoes and ten German-manufactured SST-4 wire-guided torpedoes for use against surface targets. It could make at forty-two kilometers an hour underwater or twenty-one on the surface, and had a maximum diving depth of five hundred meters. It would be a cliché common to many tales of unlikely military accomplishments to emphasize the skill of the San Luis’s crew—but in fact, Argentina’s best submarine officers were in Germany at the time of the Falkland War. In their place, the San Luis made do with junior petty officers in charge of many keys departments of the ship. Its commander, Frigate Captain Fernando Azcueta, was a submarine veteran—but did not have much experience with the Type 209 model. Moreover, the San Luis was in terrible condition and had to undergo rapid, incomplete repairs. Its snorkel was leaky, its bilge pumps were malfunctioning and one of the four diesel engines was not operational. Divers spent almost an entire week trying to clean crustaceans from the San Luis’s hull and propeller, which were impeding the vessel’s speed and stealth. The Argentine sub finally went to sea on April 11, and moved into a holding position while the political situation continued to deteriorate. Things did not come to a promising start. The San Luis’s fire control system allowed it to automatically guide three torpedoes simultaneously after launch. So, of course, it broke down after only eight days at sea, and none of its inexperienced petty officers knew how to fix it. They crew would only be able to launch one torpedo at a time under manual wire guidance. Still, it was decided the San Luis should proceed with its mission. Meanwhile, the Santa Fe, an old Balao-class submarine that had served the U.S. Navy in World War II, was dispatched on April 17 to ferry marines and technicians to reinforce troops who had seized the island of South Georgia. Though it successfully deployed the troops on April 25, it failed to depart quickly enough and was detected at 9 a.m. by the radar of a British Wessex helicopter, which was soon joined by Wasp and Lynx helicopters. The Santa Fe was damaged by two depth charges, missed by a torpedo, struck by AS-12 antishipping missiles, and strafed with machine-gun fire. The captain beached the submarine, which was captured along with its crew by British troops shortly after. The attack on the Santa Fe marked the first shots of the British campaign. The following day, the San Luis was ordered to sail for the waters around the disputed islands, and was authorized on the twenty-ninth to fire on any British warships it encountered. However, the Royal Navy had intercepted the San Luis’s communications and deployed its helicopters and frigates to hunt it down. By one count, the Royal Navy had ten frigates or destroyers and a helicopter carrier assigned at least in part to antisubmarine duties, as well as six submarines on patrol. On May 1, the San Luis’s passive sonar detected the HMS Brilliant and HMS Yarmouth, both specialized antisubmarine frigates. Azcueta launched an SST-4 torpedo at a range of nine kilometers—but shortly after launch, the guidance wires on the torpedo cut out. Azcueta quickly dove his sub into hiding on the seabed. The Brilliant detected the attack, and the two frigates and their helicopters went into a frenzied pursuit of potential sonar contacts. Launching thirty depth charges and numerous torpedoes, the British vessels successfully blew up several whales for their efforts. The following day, the British submarine Conqueror torpedoed the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano, which sank along with 323 members of its crew. The entire Argentine surface fleet subsequently withdrew to coastal waters, leaving the San Luis the only Argentine vessel opposing the British invasion force. British ships and helicopters began reporting sonar contacts and periscope sightings everywhere, and launched nine torpedoes in waters the San Luis never even ended up approaching. San Luis’s crew, for its part, thought they had been fired upon by a British submarine on May 8, and after taking evasive maneuvers, launched a Mark 37 torpedo against an undersea contact. The torpedo was heard to explode and the contact was lost. This, too, was likely a whale. Two days later, San Luis detected the Type 21 antisubmarine frigates HMS Arrow and HMS Alacrity on the northern passage of the Falkland Sound. Masked by the noise produced by the fast-moving frigates, the San Luis crept within five kilometers of Alacrity, fired another SST-4 torpedo and readied a second for launch. Yet again, the wires of the SST-4 cut out shortly after launch. However, some accounts state the torpedo actually struck a decoy being towed by HMS Arrow, but failed to detonate. Azcueta gave up on firing the second torpedo and ordered the San Luis to disengage to avoid a counterattack. However, the British ships cruised on, unaware of the attack. The captain of the Alacrity did not even learn of the close call until after the war! Demoralized, Azcueta radioed home that the torpedoes were useless, and he received permission to return to base, which he accomplished on May 19. The Argentine garrison surrendered on June 14 before San Luis could be put back to sea. Fifteen years later, San Luis became one of only three Type 209 submarines to be decommissioned after an incomplete overhaul. Another fifty-nine serve on in various navies. What went wrong with the San Luis’s torpedoes? There are a half- dozen explanations, variously holding crew error and technical flaws culpable. Manufacturer AEG first claimed the torpedoes had been launched from too far away, and without active sonar contact. Another claim is that the Argentine crews mistakenly reversed the magnetic polarity of the gyros in the torpedoes, causing them to run astray. However, there is also evidence that the torpedoes failed to arm their warheads and could not maintain depth. Suggestively, AEG implemented numerous upgrades to the torpedo after the Falklands conflict. San Luis was no super-submarine, nor did it have a super- crew. Yet, benefiting from a competent commander using ordinary tactics, it still managed to run circles around a dozen antisubmarine frigates from one of the most capable navies in the world, and might easily have sunk several warships had its torpedoes functioned as intended. The Royal Navy, for its part, expended hundreds of expensive antisubmarine munitions and dispatched 2,253 helicopter sorties chasing false contacts—without detecting the San Luis on either occasion it closed within firing range. Real submarine warfare has been, thankfully, extremely rare since World War II. The Falkland experience suggests that cheap diesel submarines could be very difficult to counter even when facing well-trained and well-equipped adversaries. Source: The National Interest This is not he only occasion that submarines have outfoxed quality ASW vessels. Adm Woodburne, while in command of SAS Emily Hobhouse managed to do the same to the RN FOF2 Task Force in 1973.

Turkish Navy Tuzla class ASW patrol boat TCG Tuzla P1200 transits Bosphorus towards the Black Sea. Photo : Yörük Işık ©

Supreme Court judge helps christen Navy ship in Mobile By Paul Gattis

The USNS Puerto Rico was christened Saturday by the Navy in Mobile on Nov. 10, 2018.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor helped christen a U.S. Navy ship on Saturday in Mobile. The USNS Puerto Rico, the Navy’s newest Expeditionary Fast Transport, was christened in a ceremony at the Austal USA shipyard, where the ship was built. Sotomayor, in a time-honored Navy tradition, christened the ship by breaking a bottle of sparkling wine across the bow. Congresswoman Jenniffer González-Colón, resident commissioner of Puerto Rico, served as principal speaker. “This ship honors the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the contributions Puerto Ricans have made to our nation and Navy and Marine Corps team,” Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer said in a press release. “USNS Puerto Rico will provide our commanders high-speed sealift mobility and agility and I am thankful for this ship, her crew, and our industrial force teammates whose service makes this great ship possible." The Puerto Rico was the 11th of 12 EPFs to be built by Austal in a $1.9 billion contract “Austal is excited to christen another amazing ship,” Austal USA President, Craig Perciavalle said in a press release. “Puerto Rico is one step closer to joining her sister ships in supporting important missions across the globe. “Congratulations to the incredible Navy – Industry team for achieving this important milestone,” continued Perciavalle. “You should be proud of the important service you’re providing our country.” The Navy said the USNS Puerto Rico, designated T-EPF 11, will be the first active ship in naval service to honor the island in the West Indies east of Hispaniola. With an all-aluminum shallow-draft hull, the EPF is a commercial-based catamaran capable of intra-theater personnel and cargo lift providing combatant commanders high-speed sealift mobility with inherent cargo handling capability and agility to achieve positional advantage over operational distances, according to the Navy,. EPF class ships are designed to transport 600 short tons of military cargo 1,200 nautical miles at an average speed of 35 knots. The ship is capable of operating in shallow-draft ports and waterways, interfacing with roll-on/roll-off discharge facilities, and on/off-loading a combat-loaded Abrams main battle tank (M1A2). Source: AL news

Royal Navy submarine in action photo via twitter

Dutch Navy’s new combat support ship to be named HNLMS Den Helder

Photo: Royal Netherlands Navy

The Royal Netherlands Navy’s new combat support ship that will be delivered in 2023 will be named HNLMS Den Helder, the navy announced on November 9. As the name of the new ship was announced, the defense ministry also shared a 3D animation of the ship arriving at the Den Helder naval base. Barbara Visser, state secretary for defense, said this is the first time a Dutch Navy ship will bear the name of Den Helder in recognition of the city’s long-standing cooperation with the navy. Den Helder serves as the logistics base for Dutch and some Belgian warships. A final contract for the construction of the combat support ship (CSS) will be signed with Dutch shipbuilder Damen in 2019. The CSS will supply other naval vessels at sea with fuel, ammunition and goods. It will be equipped with two replenishment at sea stations and feature a helicopter deck and hangar for flight operations. There is space for sea containers on the upper deck. For boarding and rescue operations and passenger transport, there are two RHIB motorboats on board. The future HNLMS Den Helder is the first in a series of new acquisitions for the Royal Netherlands Navy under the country’s 2018 defense white paper. In addition to the CSS, the Dutch Navy will receive new minehunters and frigates that will be procured in collaboration with Belgium. Source: Naval Today

HII: Future Carrier John F. Kennedy Construction Costs Down, Ship Will Launch Next Year Huntington Ingalls Industries executives expect the future aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) to launch by the end of 2019, which is ahead of schedule and will occur roughly six years since the christening of first-in-class USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). Kennedy – about 84 percent structurally complete and 53 percent complete overall – is ahead of schedule and fewer man-hours are being used to build the ship, Mike Petters, chief executive of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), said Thursday during a conference call discussing the company’s third quarter financial results with Wall Street analysts. “I think [Government Accountability Office] did a report and pointed out that the best man-hour reduction from one ship to the next in the carrier program was like 9 percent,” Petters said. “Our performance today is 15 percent.” For the quarter, HII reported revenues of $2.1 billion, compared to revenues of $1.9 billion a year ago. Earnings for the quarter were $229 million, compared with earnings of $149 million a year ago, according to the company’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

The final piece of the underwater hull of the future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) is lowered into place at Newport News Shipbuilding in September. Photo: of Huntington Ingalls Industries.

The use of digital shipbuilding imagery is a major reason for the reduction in man- hours, Petters said. The images are more accurate and provide workers a more precise guide of what jobs need to be accomplished, reducing the time to perform tasks and cutting the number of jobs requiring rework. Long-term, HII’s goal is for all ship designs to be 3-D and digital, Petters previously told USNI News. For HII, securing a long-sought-after two-carrier contract for CVN-80 and CVN-81 relies heavily on proving the follow-on Ford-class carriers can be built on time and within budget, Petters said. The Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act authorizes a “two-carrier buy if anticipated savings can be confirmed,” Petters said. Currently, Congress has set a cap for Kennedy at $11.4 billion, which if maintained, would represent nearly 15 percent drop in price from Ford’s $13 billion price tag. Interestingly, a 15 percent price drop is what HII officials have previously stated was the goal for the third Ford-class ship. Whether the Navy and HII can achieve such savings has been a near constant source of debate on Capitol Hill. Critics of Ford’s construction, which ran billions of dollars over budget and two years behind schedule, often cite this history when voicing scepticism of Kennedy’s schedule. “CVN-78 costs over $2 billion more than estimated and the Navy accepted delivery of the carrier over two years late, yet still before it was complete,” the GAO said in a June 2017 shipbuilding report. Production man-hours are the top reason costs can balloon, according to the report. However, the Navy’s plan for building CVN-79 was considered by GAO analysts as overly optimistic regarding scheduling and accounting for various risk factors that could delay construction and drive up costs. “For example, the Navy is unlikely to achieve planned construction efficiencies and is still developing technology necessary to meet requirements. Therefore, costs for CVN-79 are likely to exceed the $11.4 billion estimate,” the GAO report states. When discussing Kennedy’s progress on Thursday, Petters said by beating past expectations for reducing man-hours and staying within budget, HII will be in a strong position at a time defense spending is expected to get tougher. “I’m pretty happy with where we are because I think we are in a much more competitive position and I think our products are going to be more affordable,” Petters said. “In an environment where every dollar in the budget is a knife fight, that’s not a bad place for us to be. Source: USNI News

Damen Unveils 6000 Tons 'Omega' Frigate At IndoDefence 2018, the tri service defense exposition held in Jakarta, Indonesia, Dutch shipbuilding group Damen unveiled the new 6,000 tons class 'Omega' Frigate design. Talking to Navy Recognition at the event, Bob De Smedt, one of the naval architect who worked on the Omega project, explained that the scale model on display is representative of an early concept for the future Royal Netherlands Navy (Koninklijke Marine) and Belgian Navy M Frigate replacement. However the main reason the new Omega class of frigates was unveiled at IndoDefence is because Damen is now ready to answer Indonesia's potential need for a large frigate. Omega is actually set to be a new family or product line by Damen, that will come in addition to (and above) the famous Sigma product line. The main difference however is that there will be no "standard Omega lines": Omega designs will always be fully tailored to customer requirements. For this reason, a future Indonesian Navy (TNI AL) Omega frigate design is likely to look different to the future M Frigate replacement... unless Indonesia is willing and able to team up with the Dutch and Belgian order. The Netherlands and Belgium are jointly procuring four frigates (two each) to replace their M frigates. Navy Recognition learned from various sources that TNI AL has an "emerging need" for a 6,000 tons class of frigates as a follow on to its third and fourth PKR frigates (also a Damen design, of the Sigma family). While this design could be proposed to other navies (New Zealand comes to mind), Damen stressed that this is not the design they are offering for Germany's MKS 180. Damen could not elaborate further about MKS 180. Damen explained that the Omega / FFI frigate is based on the proven LCF / De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate hull form. The vessel features a hybrid propulsion system consisting of 4x diesel engines (two can be used for economic speed, four for sprint) plus 2x electric engines. The diesel engines are separated forward and aft for increased survivability. Power generation aboard the ship takes into account future weapon systems such as directed energy weapons. The Omega frigate features two large multi mission bays: One amidships and one at the stern. As is the trend with latest generation frigates (Type 26 and FTI/Belharra) the amidships multimission bay goes across from port to starboard sides with an overhead handling system to load and move containers or launch and recover RHIBS or USVs/UUVs. The amidships multimission bay is large enough to accommodate up to 4 x 20 foot containers and the stern multmission bay can accommodate 2 x 20 foot containers. Note that there is an additional space on the upper deck, next to the anti-ship missile launchers for 2x additional containers. The futuristic looking (almost Zumwalt-eske) topside of the Omega Frigate is mainly due to the new generation radar suite provided by Thales. Boudewijn Geerink from Thales Netherlands told Navy Recognition that it is the new S/X suite consisting of the SeaMaster 400 fixed panel S-band radar suite and the APAR Block II X-band multi-function radar, both using gallium nitride technology. According to Thales, the new fixed panel S-band radar solution is the right answer to counter threats posed by airborne or surface drones, precision-guided munitions, or submarine-fired pop-up missiles, typically attacking just above the sea surface (low elevation, sea skimming) or from high elevation angles (high diving). APAR Blk2 defends against saturation attacks in the highest threat scenarios by supporting many simultaneous AAW and ASuW engagements with both active and semi-active guidance using ICWI. Thales SeaMaster 400 offers a range of 450km while APAR Block 2 can replace illuminators to directly provide guidance for ESSM and SM-2 missiles. Omega frigate is also available with different radar configurations. A version fitted with a rotating radar (such as the Thales NS200) is also being pitched by Damen. The weapons and sensor suite depends on customer requirements as usual. However the model on display at Indodefence shows the Omega frigate fitted with a 127mm main gun by Leonardo, a 76mm secondary gun (non-penetrating variant) by Leonardo on top of the helicopter hangar, a Rheinmetall Millenium CIWS, 2 x Leonardo Hitrole remote weapon stations, 8 x Kongsberg NSM anti-ship missiles, 4 x Rheinmetall MASS decoy launchers, a Thales Kingklip hull mounted sonar and a Captas-4 variable depth sonar, 4 x satellite link antennas and 2 x Thales Mirador EO systems. For air defense, the scale model shows 24 x VLS cells (likely VL MICA NG for Indonesia or ESSM Block 2 for Netherlands and Belgium). Omega frigate/FFI early specifications: Length: 144 meters Breadth: 18.8 meters Displacement: 6100 tons Max. Speed: 29 knots Range: 5,000 nautical miles @ 18 knots Endurance: 30 days at sea Stabilisation: Rudder roll (similar to LCF) Crew: 122 sailors (accommodations for up to 160) Storage space for 3x 12 meters RHIBs Hangar space for 2x medium lift helicopters and/or UAV. Source: Navy Recognition I am not sure what the letters LCF stand for, or how it works.

Turkey announces successful test of Sapan Railgun Hypervelocity Weapon Turkey announced a successful test of its new electromagnetic weapon — referred to as ‘railgun' — which shoots metallic projectiles at hypersonic speeds. Turkey is the fifth country in the world to develop the weapon, after Russia, the US, China and India. The weapon has been named "Tübitak Sapan," or "Tübitak Slingshot," after Turkey's Scientific and Technological Research Council (Tübitak). Weapons similar to Sapan are capable of firing a projectile as far as 100 km, at speeds of up to 3,500 meters per second (12,600 km/h). According to the Turkish Armed Forces, the Sapan has been tested at 9,300 km/h, faster than Mach 7.5. Ankara intends to boost the velocity of the round to Mach 8.5 (10.500 km/h), making it almost impossible for a target to defend itself, Business Times reports. Railgun technology has certain upsides; the hypervelocity round is very difficult to intercept, and, since it has no electronics inside, it is immune to jamming and electronic warfare. In one live fire tests, a railgun successfully pierced a one meter- thick reinforced concrete bunker. The primary downside of the weapon is its extremely high energy consumption. In order to fire at 10 rounds per minute (one shot every six seconds), a railgun requires some 20 megawatts of energy - the output of a power plant used to light and heat some 250 small homes. First tested in 2014, Turkey's Sapan is a by-product of Tübitak's research into inertial confinement fusion technology, also known as controllable thermonuclear energy, Business Times reports. Turkey reportedly plans to build eight TF-2000 class frigates, equipping them with full-scale combat-ready versions of the Sapan railgun, according to the newspaper. Only five countries have working railgun technology: Russia, the US, China, India and Turkey. While the US considers railgun to primarily be a weapon, Russian scientists have more recently examined peaceful applications, such as delivering cargo into space, according to 2017 Zvezda report. Source: Sputnik I wonder whether their ammunition is cheaper than that produced in the US.

Workhorses of the sea

The Multi Purpose Offshore vessel Olympic Artemis on her way from Stavanger to Moerdijk here passing the Spijkenisse bridge on the river "Oude Maas" (November 1st, 2018) Photo : Cees van der Kooij (c)