What's new

Bangladesh begins construction of two large warships

I think it's a terrible idea.

The ideal battle strategy for Bangladesh depends on who her enemy is.

If it is a foreign power, with a long way to go to get to her assets, it is one thing. If it is a proximate power (and we all know who a proximate power* could be), it is another thing.

For a distant enemy, Bangladesh' stand, assuming we are talking of any of the states from Thailand south, or of Sri Lanka (Bangladesh going to war with Sri Lanka? Oh, go to sleep, Victoria, this is just war-gaming!) is to cause maximum damage while suffering minimum loss, and secondly, to guard her naval and industrial assets from enemy action.

On the one hand, we are looking at attack submarines, including attack submarines with the capability of launching cruise missiles. On the other hand, we are looking at a layered defence, which will ensure that an attacking enemy force faces a four times more difficult regime at every new defence line.

Against a proximate power* (you know who we're talking about), the plan is sheer survival. No specific armament or organisation can equip B'desh well enough to resist all-out attack from a proximate power, and there is no point in building up preposterous numbers of shiny new stuff. I would suggest a people's war, with the distinct republic

The fighter plan.....

*Oh, I nearly forgot to mention: obviously when I said proximate power, I was referring to Myanmar.

What were you thinking?


When you buy a stuff you should buy it for optimum use. Submarine is for offensive attacking weapon and there is no need it for it to lurk around at the coast even at the time of war with India. I would rather send it to attack Andaman fleet.

They are offensive weapons. The reason midget sub is used is because it can operate close to shore - like in 5m deep water. It is generally used in unconventional warfare for surgical strikes like those by say - SWADS.

Very useful is guerrilla warfare of attrition to destroy enemy installations and assets. These things carry a very small number of underwater launched missiles/torpedoes - typically two to four. Some of these torpedoes can be guided by humans and they can get off at the last stage (close range).

I would rather buy land based coastal defence system instead of midget subs..
 
.
Midget submarines are historically best known for surgical strikes such as harbor penetration purposes. They can attack enemy fleet at their own base.

They are commonly armed with torpedoes and mines in the form of, for example, detatchable side loads and nose sections. Alternatively they may function as swimmer delivery vehicles to deliver frogmen to the vicinity of their targets, which are then attacked with limpet mines. Typical SWADS roles.
 
.
Midget submarines are historically best known for surgical strikes such as harbor penetration purposes. They can attack enemy fleet at their own base.

They are commonly armed with torpedoes and mines in the form of, for example, detatchable side loads and nose sections. Alternatively they may function as swimmer delivery vehicles to deliver frogmen to the vicinity of their targets, which are then attacked with limpet mines. Typical SWADS roles.

Cant we just get out of terrorist type warfare mentality... ?

Didn't you see the world has changed a bit in the last 2 decades. ???
 
. .
Midget subs have their uses when launched by a mother support ship and manned by a one- or two-person commando crew — and are ideally suited for stealth operations. Their military use dates back hundreds of years. And they are still effective.

For a smaller navy with few resources - BN has to be inventive enough to provide a effective deterrent at very low cost. That is all it is - a deterrent.

I don't see the connection with terrorism at all.

Let's agree to disagree - shall we? It is pointless to argue.
 
.
Midget subs have their uses when launched by a mother support ship and manned by a one- or two-person commando crew — and are ideally suited for stealth operations. Their military use dates back hundreds of years. And they are still effective.

For a smaller navy with few resources - BN has to be inventive enough to provide a effective deterrent at very low cost. That is all it is - a deterrent.

I don't see the connection with terrorism at all.

Let's agree to disagree - shall we? It is pointless to argue.

I don't see any use for this except against Calcutta. Perhaps Haldia or Paradip. And you can bet that they will be guarded, especially after these craft are inducted officially.

It just don't compute.
 
.
I don't see any use for this except against Calcutta. Perhaps Haldia or Paradip. And you can bet that they will be guarded, especially after these craft are inducted officially.

It just don't compute.

Why don't you study why the Pakistani and Iranian Navies (among quite a few other Navies around the world) have them? What are the uses in these Navies??

Arguments have to be based on reasons and facts - not conjecture and (at times - uninformed) opinion.
 
.
Why don't you study why the Pakistani and Iranian Navies (among quite a few other Navies around the world) have them? What are the uses in these Navies??

Arguments have to be based on reasons and facts - not conjecture and (at times - uninformed) opinion.

Uses?

What uses?

Look who's talking of conjectures and uninformed opinion.

When you buy a stuff you should buy it for optimum use. Submarine is for offensive attacking weapon and there is no need it for it to lurk around at the coast even at the time of war with India. I would rather send it to attack Andaman fleet.



I would rather buy land based coastal defence system instead of midget subs..


You mean hovercraft? and land-based anti-ship missile systems? Makes a lot of sense.
 
.
Uses?

What uses?

Look who's talking of conjectures and uninformed opinion.

Did you even happen to read my post #207 above?

Read @kalu_miah's linked post and if you wish, let's argue based on facts, not simple one liner responses.

That is - if you want to.

Back on topic, @Arsalan bhai had posted an image of the 100 ton class SX-756 Class midget submarine sometime back - these are used by Pakistan's SSGN.

"The SX-756 submarines were the first of a new design by Cosmos of Livorno. The first 3 craft were sold to Pakistan in kit form and arrived in Karachi in 1988. When the deal for the submarines was signed, it was no coincidence that Adm Tariq Kamal Khan was CNS. As a former SSGN and first CO of PNS Iqbal following its commission on 29 March 1967, he understood full well the potential of SOF and unconventional warfare. Cosmos marketed the submarine as the MG-110 along with another variant known as the MG-120ER. The latter is known to be in service with Italy, South Korea and Columbia. The SDV's delivered to PN in the 1970's are no longer in use and were withdrawn from service in the late 90's. Some of thse SDV's now serve as reminders of a past era for SSGN as part of a display at the Maritime museum in Karachi."

Source: PN mini-submarine fleet | Page 2
ssgn_06.jpg
25_17067_227a34f42ee849c.jpg


Here's a dockyard view,
launchingin1987.jpg
EXWNIqW.png



Also on topic, DCNS had discussed the building of the mid-sized SMX-23 class in Pakistan sometime back (Late 2000's).

These mid-sized 800 ton subs can stay closer to shore (say within 100 miles) and can provide a second layer of defense before the enemy gets to the third layer - which is shore-based missile defenses and the above 100 ton midget subs for both air and surface-based intruders (such as para-trooper dropping aircraft, landing craft, hovercraft etc.).

OF3olW2.jpg

cfd230f98870d2a33a2921b410fdf785-jpg.62668


Further Info on the Pakistani SX-756 class. Cos.Mo.S. Spa from Italy who designed these is now bankrupt. Karachi Shipyard can start making copies and selling them to willing Navies - there are plenty of takers.

Instruments: Hydrocompass, autopilot, two sonars, automatic direction finder, bathythermograph, underwater telephone, radio and satellite communications, optical and television periscopes, navigation console, doppler log, and underwater collision avoidance apparatus.

The SX-756 is a straightforward adaptation of the earlier SX-506 model, with increased range, endurance and weapons carrying capacity, resulting in a 2.2 meter increase in length. South Korea and Pakistan are the only two countries known to have operated SX-756s. Cos.Mo.S. fabricated five of these boats on-site in South Korea from prefabricated sections shipped out from the company’s factory in Livorno. Three more were purchased by Pakistan. In service, Korea’s boats were designated SX-756/K while Pakistan’s were referred to as SX-756/W. The three Pakistani boats were later upgraded to MG-110/LR (see later entry).

Intended missions for the SX-756 were largely the same as for Cos.Mo.S’ previous boats, with the additional option of a torpedo attack capability carried as an add-on external tube.

Specifications:
Crew: 6 plus 8 swimmers.
Propulsion: 1x 200-hp Diesel engine, 1x 55-hp electric motor;
Cruising range on diesel engines: 1600 miles at 6 knots; on the electric motor 60 miles at 4 knots.
Full speed: 8.5kts surfaced, 6kts submerged.
Displacement: 73 tons surface, 80 tons submerged.
Endurance: 20 days
Dimensions: Length: 25.2 meters (82.68 feet), Beam 2.1 meters

Armament options:
(A) 6x Mk. 21 bottom-type mines (300 kg explosives), 8x Mk. 11 charges (50 kg of explosives) and 40x small magnetic mines;
(B) 6x ammunition charge containers with an overall weight of 1800kg;
(C) 2x CE2F/60 (or 100) chariot SDVs and 8x Mk.11 charges or 8x magnetic mines;
(D) 2x 324-mm torpedo tubes and two spare torpedoes (tube mounted externally in same place as chariots);
(E) 6x Mk.21/W bottom mines (300 kg explosives) and 8x Mk.11/W mines.
The torpedo apparatus and containers, bottom mines are placed on external mounts, the small demolition charges are carried between the casing and upper hull cylinder

On a more modern subject, South Korea also uses the KSS 500A which is another 500 ton midget sub, perfect for Bangladesh littoral waters.

While the public has yet to lay eyes on designs for this third-phase Korean attack submarine (planned for deployment sometime around 2018) the Kormarine Expo 2011 Naval & Defense Show did preview what’s currently brewing in South Korea’s submarine development world, namely the KS 500A Submarine, a domestically designed and produced replacement for the aging Dolgorae midget submarines:

1396695055.jpg


The KSS 500A will fill a similar mission profile to the Dolgorae Class, tabbed for special operations within littoral /coastal regions. It’s larger than the Dolgorae (37m length/510ton surface displacement, compared to the Dolgorae’s 25m length/150 tons), though still significantly smaller than the ROK Navy’s attack submarines. The KSS 500A will be far quieter than the obsolete Dolgorae, and with its new lithium-ion battery engine systems, should be able to reduce indiscretion rates compared to many current diesel-battery configurations.

The submarine can operate with a minimum crew of five, although ten will be standard for continual operation via shifts. It will have deployment capabilities for seven or more special operations forces, likely deployable without need for surfacing. This is seen as an important asset in conducting surveillance and insertion missions against North Korea in the shallow coastal regions of the Yellow Sea. The KSS 500A will also have a weapons compliment consisting of up to two heavy torpedoes, four light torpedoes, mines and/or vertically launched missiles.

The submarine is a believed test bed for the ROKN’s final phase in their attack submarine program, as many of the technologies planned for these submarines will likely see larger-scale integration on their phase three attack submarines. Current plans are for five to be produced, with construction set to begin next year.

As the ROK Navy begins shopping around their older submarines (in both building new type 209s for other countries, or potentially selling their oldest 209s), it will be interesting to see South Korea’s plans for it’s modern submarine fleet continue to evolve and grow. The introduction of the KSS-500A gives a good template for where the ROK Navy’s currently heading with their technology and hull designs.

We eagerly await seeing how the KSS 500A stacks up against similar submarines in its class, as well as learning more about how its success/failure will impact the third phase of attack sub development.
 
.
Let's talk about the scenario of a sea-blockade or conversely - shore invasion. Those could be two scenarios where midget subs could be low cost effective deterrents/countermeasures.

@Penguin bhai, @damiendehorn bhai.

Midgets' primary use in is special operations, which can include offensive actions e.g. sneaking into an enemy stronghold to sink ships. For coastal defence, well, the Cheonan incident shows small boats can pack a punch. Picture Shkval like fast torpedo's on a small boat. But this would have to loiter/creep around in order to not be detected. Instead, you can also use mobile landbased AShM missile batteries with 200-300km range. Or, rather than putting VLSs on small boats, or expensive supercavitating torps, you could also make concrete underwater remote control firing stations.
 
.
Midgets' primary use in is special operations, which can include offensive actions e.g. sneaking into an enemy stronghold to sink ships. For coastal defence, well, the Cheonan incident shows small boats can pack a punch. Picture Shkval like fast torpedo's on a small boat. But this would have to loiter/creep around in order to not be detected. Instead, you can also use mobile landbased AShM missile batteries with 200-300km range. Or, rather than putting VLSs on small boats, or expensive supercavitating torps, you could also make concrete underwater remote control firing stations.

Wow!

A wealth of ideas! Thanks :-)

Yes, the Cheonan was sunk by a North Korean Midget sub (Yugo or whatever the prototype of the Iranian Ghadri class was).

With the shallow seas around our coastal areas - the underwater remote control firing stations are also a superb and cost-appropriate solution. :-)

What is your opinion of the 800 ton SMX-23 and 500 ton KS-500 classes? Too small and impractical with no AIP?

Our coastline is pretty small unlike other larger neighbors....
 
Last edited:
.
Wow!

A wealth of ideas! Thanks :-)

Yes, the Cheonan was sunk by a North Korean Midget sub (Yugo or whatever the prototype of the Iranian Ghadri class was).

With the shallow seas around our coastal areas - the underwater remote control firing stations are also a superb and cost-appropriate solution. :-)

What is your opinion of the 800 ton SMX-23 and 500 ton KS-500 classes? Too small and impractical with no AIP?
They seem modern and quite capable. And, though small, probably not cheap (whether you carry 2 or 8 Exocet, you still need all targeting and control equipment. Still, I would not rely solely on midgets. But they make a good force multiplier closer to coast.

Coastal defence

ship.jpg

FUKURYU Japanese navy divers

sunken_pillbox.jpg


Harbor defence, Torpedo battery, Flushing, NL, 1945
foto-3-300x215.jpg
url
 
Last edited:
. .
Midget submarines might work against Burmese Navy if they have their protection suites switched off or non-existent to begin with in their harbours and ships.

That too we are talking about special operations, which add next to no deterrence value in the event of an India - B'desh conflict or even a B'desh-Myanmar conflict where the bulk of fighting will be on the ground....unless you acquire dozens of them covertly to try some sort of saturation attack on one harbour...if you are somehow able to survive as a nation more than a week....and get to a "middle phase" at all. So again maybe with Burma....but doubtful since I think money and resources are best spent elsewhere in that cause.
 
.
^^^ OK enough fruitless talk.

None of you geniuses have the strategic answer I was looking for.

If the Chinese and US Navies are building littoral class ships then either the IN is backward or has the wrong priorities. Which actually wouldn't surprise me.

'Vikhari-maditya' broke down three times during its re-build-trials and almost couldn't make it back to India because seven of its eight boilers failed. I'm surprised this rust bucket could get fixed and still floats. The Russians milked your stingy asses good and kudos to them.

I hope Viraat (or whatever you're calling it this week) has better boilers. Scaring us with a carrier is not going to go far. It's a sitting duck for a bunch of sea-skimming ALCMs. Make sure you keep it 300 miles away....

Next!

There will never be any military confrontation with Bangladesh, rest assured. Indian Navy will never be a threat to Bangladesh.

Bangladesh has a huge advantage of being a nation successfully shares good relations with all nations in the region, there is no reason for it to change that equation.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom