The fate of the PNS Ghazi

[Myth_buster_1]

For all that I care, a killer whale could have downed it. I think the the Indian Navy was happy that the submarine was at the bottom of the ocean. How it got there mattered little.

My question is why do you feel the need to hide behind a possible fallacy that its own mine killed the submarine? Does this stem from a belief that Indians are inept and incapable of fighting. So the only rational explanation is that it must have been its own mine which took the submarine down.

Btw, what do you mean by me 'being an Indian'?

How am i hiding behind a possible fallacy?
But more important question is. Why do you feel that ghazi was indeed destroyed by Indian? Do you have any evidence to support your claim? Heck even IN has no evidence to support their claim.

Again. Repeating this for the third time for a person who lacks comprehension. If you would google a bit more on the subject other then lazy poorly researched Indian BS wikipedia reserach their are quite alot researches that provides better understanding of the subject. Ghazi was fallowing pre planned missions before setting of to mission. During its mine laying missions one of the mines detonated on its own or accidentally.

This thread starting article clearly states that Indian navy have not been able to find the cause of PN Ghazi destruction. If it was indeed destroyed by IN torpedo, mine, or depth charges then IN would have acknowledge this fact.

 

[deepak75]

How am i hiding behind a possible fallacy?
But more important question is. Why do you feel that ghazi was indeed destroyed by Indian? Do you have any evidence to support your claim? Heck even IN has no evidence to support their claim.

Again. Repeating this for the third time for a person who lacks comprehension. If you would google a bit more on the subject other then lazy poorly researched Indian BS wikipedia reserach their are quite alot researches that provides better understanding of the subject. Ghazi was fallowing pre planned missions before setting of to mission. During its mine laying missions one of the mines detonated on its own or accidentally.

This thread starting article clearly states that Indian navy have not been able to find the cause of PN Ghazi destruction. If it was indeed destroyed by IN torpedo, mine, or depth charges then IN would have acknowledge this fact.

Sir, with whatever little I have been able to read about the sinking of PNZ Ghazi the following facts can be established:

1. It primary mission was to damage/sink INS Viraat.
2. Indian Navy knew of the Pakistani plans so they had anyway stowed off INS Viraat and the battle group off Andaman.
3. When PNS Ghazi arrived at Vizag, then it was not able to locate INS Viraat at the harbour.
4. PNS Ghazi then scoured the ocean a little bit seraching for INS Viraat (this is more speculation than a fact).
5. Then PNS Ghazi primary mission was aborted and the secondary mission was to lay mines off the Vizag harbour (no evidence to corroborate that it was a sanctioned mission or the boat's commander decision).
6. INS Rajput was involved in the endgame of PNS Ghazi (whether it was a depth charge that INS Rajput deployed or whether it was its own mines that PNS Ghazi ran over or whether it was a dive that it had to undertake and the mine was not shot off or if it was a armed torpedo that was not released due to the dive or any other reason that could be a possibility).

Now, already having admitted my limited knowledge of this event but given the facts (?) above, how are you certain that PNS Ghazi was sunk of its own mines and not the INS Rajput depth charges?

The only post mortem that was done was via the TV cameras of a sub retriever that Indian Navy deployed to determine the fate of PNS Ghazi and nothing else. The damage to the hull depicted could also have been due to a depth charge making contact and at the same time the mine also going off in the torpedo compartment.

Given the limited information, how are you so sure that it could not in any way have been the depth charge from INS Rajput that was in any way contributive to the fate of PNS Ghazi?

 

[honour]

indiarocks was answering you so u got him suspended...useless u r

 

[third eye]

Can we let the sailors rest in peace ?

Be it the Khukri or Ghazi, those on board died for their countries & went down as true warriors.

 

[honour]

A depth charge? Do u know what that means? IN destroyed ghazi?
My question is, do u know what u are talking about or u r just being an Indian?[/QUOTE

yup !!!brother before questioning anyone u tell whats Ur knowledge you r relying on Ur version of truth ..please try to open Ur eyes to all aspect...also how does it matters it it was sunk by in or it attempted suicide

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Sir, with whatever little I have been able to read about the sinking of PNZ Ghazi the following facts can be established:

1. It primary mission was to damage/sink INS Viraat.
2. Indian Navy knew of the Pakistani plans so they had anyway stowed off INS Viraat and the battle group off Andaman.
3. When PNS Ghazi arrived at Vizag, then it was not able to locate INS Viraat at the harbour.
4. PNS Ghazi then scoured the ocean a little bit seraching for INS Viraat (this is more speculation than a fact).
5. Then PNS Ghazi primary mission was aborted and the secondary mission was to lay mines off the Vizag harbour (no evidence to corroborate that it was a sanctioned mission or the boat's commander decision).
6. INS Rajput was involved in the endgame of PNS Ghazi (whether it was a depth charge that INS Rajput deployed or whether it was its own mines that PNS Ghazi ran over or whether it was a dive that it had to undertake and the mine was not shot off or if it was a armed torpedo that was not released due to the dive or any other reason that could be a possibility).

Now, already having admitted my limited knowledge of this event but given the facts (?) above, how are you certain that PNS Ghazi was sunk of its own mines and not the INS Rajput depth charges?

The only post mortem that was done was via the TV cameras of a sub retriever that Indian Navy deployed to determine the fate of PNS Ghazi and nothing else. The damage to the hull depicted could also have been due to a depth charge making contact and at the same time the mine also going off in the torpedo compartment.

Given the limited information, how are you so sure that it could not in any way have been the depth charge from INS Rajput that was in any way contributive to the fate of PNS Ghazi?

All i have to say, you are poorly informed with poorly researched wikipeedia.

your version of the story is nothing but indians trying to claim a kill from a accident. Its like a PAF fighter jet over indian territory crashed due to a engine failure and indians claiming a kill by giving reasons that IAF and IA had deployed SAMS and anti-aircraft guns.

if you havent read the thread starting post properly or didnt comprehend it.. It does say that Indian Navy has not been able to come up with any evidence or reports that indeed Ghazi was destroyed by Indian NAVY. NO SUCH RECORDS IN INDIAN NAVY EXISTS!

---------- Post added at 07:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 PM ----------

indiarocks was answering you so u got him suspended...useless u r

And you must be the same kid with multiple ID? right?

 

[Areesh]

Some Indians can't accept the fact that Ghazi wasn't destroyed by their navy but because of some accident. They want to attribute something to IN which it never did.

Well some honest senior Indian navy officials know the truth and they said it was some internal explosion which caused the accident not depth charges.

Commodore KS Subra Manian recalls:

"In the course of the diving operation, I interrogated the divers to find out how exactly the damage had happened to the submarine. From what I gathered, it looked to me that there had been an internal explosion. The hull had blown outwards. That could only be attributed to an internal explosion of a mine which was still in the tubes. Again a hydrogen explosion inside could also be the cause. At that time, I put down the cause of the GHAZI's sinking as a case of internal explosion due to her own mines blowing up or due to hydrogen. Looking back now after the lapse of so many years, it seems to me that the cause of her blowing up was most probably a hydrogen explosion. I base this conclusion on the fact that the hull had blown outwards near the mid section of the submarine and not right forward near the torpedo tubes. Had a mine exploded in the tube or in the forward compartment while being handled, the damage would have been for'd.

So what you want now. Don't say we bribe Commodore KS Subra Manian. I can accept anything from some Indian members.

We have discuss this on another thread too.

PN's First Since World War 2

 

[scrumpy]

Some Indians can't accept the fact that Ghazi wasn't destroyed by their navy but because of some accident. They want to attribute something to IN which it never did.

Don't you think this applies vice-versa too? Who do you think have been displaying a more close minded approach to this incident.

People with all their comprehension skills at their disposal still do not appear to understand that the arguments they make equally apply to them too.

Commodore Subramanian may be right and the submarine may have sunk due to an internal explosion.

I found the following document on what looks like the Indian Navy website.
CHAPTER-9

Some of the people involved in the salvage operations are quoted in that page. They each give their theories as to what had happened. It looks like a fairly well balanced document which makes interesting reading.

 

[deckingraj]

Some Indians can't accept the fact that Ghazi wasn't destroyed by their navy but because of some accident. They want to attribute something to IN which it never did.

Well some honest senior Indian navy officials know the truth and they said it was some internal explosion which caused the accident not depth charges.

So what you want now. Don't say we bribe Commodore KS Subra Manian. I can accept anything from some Indian members.

We have discuss this on another thread too.

PN's First Since World War 2

Are you high or what??? This is his perception and findings...Since it fits your view you are accepting it with both hands... here is another article explaining the incident in a very balanced way

BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR: Volume 4(2) September-October 2001

Let me highlight a few points worth mentioning...

"The deployment of the Ghazi to the Bay of Bengal was revealed to the Indian Navy when a signal addressed to the naval authorities in Chittagong in East Pakistan was intercepted requesting information on a special grade of lubrication oil that was used only by submarines and minesweepers. As minesweepers and the Daphne class submarines did not have the range to operate in the Bay of Bengal, it was assumed that the submarine Ghazi was stalking the Vikrant"

[DR:]In other words Indian Strategist were convinced that Gazi was out there looking out for Vikrant...and thus makes us believe that IN would have used all the possible counter measures to sink the beast...

"Having sailed the fleet away to safety, the major task was to deceive the enemy into thinking that the Vikrant was where she was not and lure the Ghazi to where the Indian Navy would attack her. In Vishakapatnam, more rations were ordered from the contractors to whom it was obvious that this meant that the fleet was present there in Vishakapatnam. Having no doubt that spies existed, the C-in-C was banking on bazaar rumors being picked up by them and being relayed to Pakistan. Special pains were taken to inform the various fishing communities in and around the coastal city of Vishakapatnam to act as special "lookouts" and this meant explaining to them about oil slicks, what a submarine looked like and how to identify telltale evidence etc."

[DR:]This further support my claim about Indian Strategist convinced about what Ghazi was upto and in fact trying to form a strategy to lure Ghazi into Vishaka port...

He made it clear that once Rajput had completed refueling, she must leave the harbor with all navigational aids switched off. Once clear of the harbor, he had to assume that an enemy submarine was in the vicinity. He was told that if the deception plan had worked, the Ghazi would be prowling about, looking for the Vikrant and in the darkness, she may mistake one of the merchantmen for the carrier and have a go or could be laying a mine-field. Due to the total blackout and navigational hazards, the submarine may even make the mistake of surfacing.

[DR:]Again suggest the countermeasure to find out whereabouts of Ghazi...

The Rajput sailed out on 2 December and returned to Vishakapatnam on 3 December and again sailed out with a pilot on board, just before the midnight of 3/4 December and on clearing the harbor, proceeded along the narrow entrance channel.

[DR:]This time frame is very important...as there were many theories which suggested Rajput was no where near the place where Ghazi sank...

At exactly 0015 hrs two tremendous and simultaneous explosions were heard by the Coast battery, which reported it to the maritime operations room. The explosions shattered quite a few windowpanes around the coast. The Rajput got a heavy jolt after the deafening blasts. Several thousand people who were waiting to hear the Prime Minister's broadcast to the nation also heard the explosions and many came out thinking that it was an earthquake.

[DR:]This suggest that Rajput was near vicinity where Ghazi sank... Also the time frame is similar to when Rajput release depth two depth charges....

The official version of the Indian Navy is that the Ghazi was sunk by the Rajput's depth charges at around midnight of 3/4 December. However, there have been several opposing theories put forward mainly due to the confusion of dates and when the Rajput sailed out on it's mission which led analysts to conclude that the Rajput was nowhere near when the explosions took place.

Though, it was later confirmed without doubt that the Ghazi exploded at 00:15 hrs on 3/4 December when the Rajput sailed out,

[DR:]The above two suggests that Rajput was in the vicinity of Ghazi when the beast sank...

It has been well established that the position where the depth charges were launched was almost exactly where the wreck of the Ghazi was found so damage to the latter by the charges was almost inevitable. The clock recovered from the wreck of the Ghazi had stopped functioning at exactly 00:15 hrs, which was around 10-15 minutes after the charges were launched.

[DR:]This kind of suggest that Ghazi sank in 10-15 minutes after Rajput launched depth charges...

However, on interrogation, the divers revealed that the hull had been blown outwards, probably due an internal explosion. One of the causes for this could have been a Hydrogen explosion, which may occur while recharging of the batteries, but if this were the case, the bodies found in the Ghazi would have been charred a lot more. Also, the possibility of an external mine causing the sinking was completely ruled out due to the amount of internal damage suffered and the forward section of the hull being splayed outward.

[DR:] This suggest that possible cause of sinking cannot be detonation of outside mine as the hull was blown outwards...Also if it was a hydrogen explosion then why were bodies not charred??


In the end there is no concrete conclusion on what actually happened...However the following things are beyond doubt

- IN was well aware of what Ghazi was upto and in fact were luring ghazi to come to Vishak Port
- IN had well thought counter measures and strategies were being implemented. In other words bait for Ghazi was on and things were going the way IN wanted them to be..

Just look at the last message received by Ghazi


* FROM COMSUBS TO GHAZI INFO PAK NAVY DTG 252307/NOV 71
OCCUPY ZONE VICOTR WITH ALL DISPATCH
INTELLIGENCE INDICATES CARRIER IN PORT.

- Rajput was in close vicinity to where Ghazi sank and in fact release two depth charges just 10-15 minuted before Ghazi sank


Now whatever you want to infer one thing is for sure IN played its part in getting a kill of this beast...However as said by many members the way we cannot conclude that it was Rajput who caused the kill the same way we cannot conclude that it was external mine or internal explosion...

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Don't you think this applies vice-versa too? Who do you think have been displaying a more close minded approach to this incident.

People with all their comprehension skills at their disposal still do not appear to understand that the arguments they make equally apply to them too.

Commodore Subramanian may be right and the submarine may have sunk due to an internal explosion.

I found the following document on what looks like the Indian Navy website.
CHAPTER-9

Some of the people involved in the salvage operations are quoted in that page. They each give their theories as to what had happened. It looks like a fairly well balanced document which makes interesting reading.

No more Indian BS bias versions, and assumptions.

Here read this and i am not interested in arguing with brain washed indians anymore.

The sinking of Pakistani submarine Ghazi in the 1971 Indo-Pak war may have been one of the high points of India's first-ever emphatic military victory but there are no records available with naval authorities on how the much-celebrated feat was pulled off.

 

[deckingraj]

No more Indian BS bias versions, and assumptions.

Here read this and i am not interested in arguing with brain washed indians anymore.

Relax man...I am not sure why you become so hyper....People cannot change their understanding because you think otherwise... The article which you are quoting again and again does not prove what you are saying...

Here is one quote

On June 22, 1998, Rear Admiral K Mohanrao, then chief of staff of Visakhapatnam-based Eastern Naval Command, told Vice Admiral G M Hiranandani, who was writing the official history of Navy, "All-out efforts were made to locate historical artifacts of Ghazi from various offices and organizations of this headquarters. However, regretfully, I was unable to lay my hands on many of the documents that I personally saw during my previous tenure."

In other words these documents are missing...However does that imply that these documents were purposefully destroyed to glorify IN?? Not a single person is claiming here that Ghazi was sanked by INS Rajput because we are not sure...All we are discussing is that circumstancial evidence do not conclude any theory

- Be it INS Rajput : Why the hull is blown outward
- External Mine : Same reasoning as above
- Internal Explosion - State of bodies of those brave sailors do not support this claim either

Even PN navy is not sure if it is either of these...So how come you are??? If possible share you thoughts on my post#73 and this time with some patience...

P.S : Ghazi did sink and its pretty obvious PN would try to establish it was not a successful kill by IN and IN would like to claim the kill... However none can conclude with proofs... There is a saying "Success has many Father's whereas Defeat is an orphan"

 

[Areesh]

Are you high or what??? This is his perception and findings...Since it fits your view you are accepting it with both hands... here is another article explaining the incident in a very balanced way

BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR: Volume 4(2) September-October 2001

Let me highlight a few points worth mentioning...



[DR:]In other words Indian Strategist were convinced that Gazi was out there looking out for Vikrant...and thus makes us believe that IN would have used all the possible counter measures to sink the beast...




[DR:]This further support my claim about Indian Strategist convinced about what Ghazi was upto and in fact trying to form a strategy to lure Ghazi into Vishaka port...




[DR:]Again suggest the countermeasure to find out whereabouts of Ghazi...

[DR:]This time frame is very important...as there were many theories which suggested Rajput was no where near the place where Ghazi sank...



[DR:]This suggest that Rajput was near vicinity where Ghazi sank... Also the time frame is similar to when Rajput release depth two depth charges....




[DR:]The above two suggests that Rajput was in the vicinity of Ghazi when the beast sank...


[DR:]This kind of suggest that Ghazi sank in 10-15 minutes after Rajput launched depth charges...


[DR:] This suggest that possible cause of sinking cannot be detonation of outside mine as the hull was blown outwards...Also if it was a hydrogen explosion then why were bodies not charred??


In the end there is no concrete conclusion on what actually happened...However the following things are beyond doubt

- IN was well aware of what Ghazi was upto and in fact were luring ghazi to come to Vishak Port
- IN had well thought counter measures and strategies were being implemented. In other words bait for Ghazi was on and things were going the way IN wanted them to be..

Just look at the last message received by Ghazi


* FROM COMSUBS TO GHAZI INFO PAK NAVY DTG 252307/NOV 71
OCCUPY ZONE VICOTR WITH ALL DISPATCH
INTELLIGENCE INDICATES CARRIER IN PORT.

- Rajput was in close vicinity to where Ghazi sank and in fact release two depth charges just 10-15 minuted before Ghazi sank


Now whatever you want to infer one thing is for sure IN played its part in getting a kill of this beast...However as said by many members the way we cannot conclude that it was Rajput who caused the kill the same way we cannot conclude that it was external mine or internal explosion...

I think your post is stupid because you present something which we already know. I know that many Indian navy officials repeat this BS but their are some sane individuals also in IN.

Read what I said:

Well some honest senior Indian navy officials know the truth and they said it was some internal explosion which caused the accident not depth charges.

I know many Indian officials present this BS story but

1 The contradiction in their versions
2 The missing documents

prove easily that INS Rajput wasn't behind Ghazi and its sinking. They simple don't have proves for it. I presented one to you directly from your site.

PN has no contradiction and is firm with it's version that it was destroyed because of any accident or internal explosion not by INS rajput.. They explicitly claim that INS rajput didn't destroy Ghazi. To claim that INS rajput destroyed Ghazi is ridiculous. As far as IN is concerned they are confused and have contradictions. INS Rajput story is flawed and weak.

I think these words of times of India are a perfect answer for you and other India members.

A retired Navy officer who saw action in 1971 said the destruction of the Ghazi papers and those of Army in Kolkata are all fitting into a larger trend, many of them suspected about Indian war history, of deliberate falsification in many instances. It is high time the real history of those past actions were revealed. "We have enough heroes," he said. "In the fog of war, many myths and false heroes may have been created and many honest ones left unsung," he admitted.

 

[deckingraj]

I think your post is stupid because you present something which we already know. I know that many Indian navy officials repeat this BS but their are some sane individuals also in IN.

Read what I said:



I know many Indian officials present this BS story but

1 The contradiction in their versions
2 The missing documents

prove easily that INS Rajput wasn't behind Ghazi and its sinking. They simple don't have proves for it. I presented one to you directly from your site.

I have just one word for you...TROLL...I am feeling sorry to write such a long reply to a person who seriously lacks comprehensive skills...If you had used an iota of this skill you would have figured out that i am not claiming INS Rajput killed Ghazi....All i am saying that there is not a single fool proof theory...

PN has no contradiction and is firm with it's version that it was destroyed because of any accident or internal explosion not by INS rajput.. They explicitly claim that INS rajput didn't destroy Ghazi. To claim that INS rajput destroyed Ghazi is ridiculous. As far as IN is concerned they are confused and have contradictions. INS Rajput story is flawed and weak.

I think these words of times of India are a perfect answer for you and other India members.

Hahaha...Bolded part gives an inclination about your distorted mind...Anyways amy be by mistake but you have acknowledged what i am saying....

PN and IN both could not conclusively say what actually killed Ghazi....As per your words Even PN do not know was it an internal explosion or external explosion...All they are saying is it is not Rajput...Now just use some brain and think that it is very obvious that PN would like to deny glory to IN if in fact they killed Ghazi and IN would like to glorify by claiming the kill even if they do not...However both could not provide proofs for their respective claims...

Now see once again to what i concluded either contradict that or simply admit you cannot debate instead of calling my post stupid...

"Now whatever you want to infer one thing is for sure IN played its part in getting a kill of this beast...However as said by many members the way we cannot conclude that it was Rajput who caused the kill the same way we cannot conclude that it was external mine or internal explosion.."

Post # 75 further clarify's the same conclusion...

 

[Areesh]

I have just one word for you...TROLL...I am feeling sorry to write such a long reply to a person who seriously lacks comprehensive skills...If you had used an iota of this skill you would have figured out that i am not claiming INS Rajput killed Ghazi....All i am saying that there is not a single fool proof theory...



Hahaha...Bolded part gives an inclination about your distorted mind...Anyways amy be by mistake but you have acknowledged what i am saying....

PN and IN both could not conclusively say what actually killed Ghazi....As per your words Even PN do not know was it an internal explosion or external explosion...All they are saying is it is not Rajput...Now just use some brain and think that it is very obvious that PN would like to deny glory to IN if in fact they killed Ghazi and IN would like to glorify by claiming the kill even if they do not...However both could not provide proofs for their respective claims...

Now see once again to what i concluded either contradict that or simply admit you cannot debate instead of calling my post stupid...

"Now whatever you want to infer one thing is for sure IN played its part in getting a kill of this beast...However as said by many members the way we cannot conclude that it was Rajput who caused the kill the same way we cannot conclude that it was external mine or internal explosion.."

Post # 75 further clarify's the same conclusion...

I don't want to say anything. Just Indians have a serious lack to comprehend the truth from across the border.

1 PN is saying that it was internal explosion
2 Some senior IN officials say the same
3 Times of Indian is indirectly saying the same

But the keyboard warriors still say that there is very confusion that what happened to Ghazi.

What can I say...

You can live with this illusion but don't expect that we would do the same.

 

[deckingraj]

I don't want to say anything. Just Indians have a serious lack to comprehend the truth from across the border.

1 PN is saying that it was internal explosion
2 Some senior IN officials say the same
3 Times of Indian is indirectly saying the same

But the keyboard warriors still say that there is very confusion that what happened to Ghazi.

What can I say...

You can live with this illusion but don't expect that we would do the same.

No offense but are you high or what is wrong with you???? I have questioned all the three possible explanations...and is saying that NONE of them cna be concluded...In case you differ then challenge those conclusions instead of giving gyaan on Indians and illusions.... for your help let me post my points ONCE AGAIN


most popular claimed reasons for PNS ghazi demise

a) INS Rajput
b) External Mine
c) Internal Explosion

however circumstantial evidence do not conclude any theory because

a) Why the hull was blown outward(This contradicts with Rajput and External Mine claims)??
b) Internal Explosion - If there was such a powerful internal explosion then why state of bodies were not charred supporting the internal explosion theory?

Just to show an example how you should answer to this post of mine let me take your points one by one...

1 PN is saying that it was internal explosion
2 Some senior IN officials say the same
3 Times of Indian is indirectly saying the same

1) You earlier post suggested otherwise... this is what you wrote

"PN has no contradiction and is firm with it's version that it was destroyed because of any accident or internal explosion not by INS rajput.."

I do not know the official PN theory but i am going with this one...i.e as per PN it was internal explosion, however i have questioned even that theory above...care to explaing your reasoning...

2) Doesn't mean anything...Many IN officials says it was mine...many says INS rajput...Why are you being selective here??? Support/reject the claim on merit and not on coincidence of same claim...
3) Same as above...

Also as far as missing documents is concerned it do not prove that those documents were destroyed to glorify IN..Had that been the case they would have been destroyed way earlier(then when they went missing) and so many IN officials would not have been authorized to research the possible cause of kill...


P.S : Do you see some fair questions or everything is sounding illusion to you??...Now leave this debate if you don't have the knowledge to answer them... Someone more knowledgeable might answer...