Author Topic: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad  (Read 17444 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 896
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #50 on: November 22, 2018, 15:43:23 »
A rendition of the damage she received.



4-6 watertight bulkheads if my guess is right.  Tough to survive that.  The progressive flooding would be to much for the crew to handle.  Brutal.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #51 on: November 22, 2018, 15:50:41 »
The damage c ontrol lessons from this and the USN ships will be useful and hopefully will show the importance of such training and perhaps instruct ship designers to make changes to improve ship survival. It may also influence the argument between using civilian vs military ship standards.

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 24,205
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 746
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #52 on: November 22, 2018, 16:59:05 »
The damage c ontrol lessons from this and the USN ships will be useful and hopefully will show the importance of such training and perhaps instruct ship designers to make changes to improve ship survival. It may also influence the argument between using civilian vs military ship standards.

Not really, that damage surpassed all DC design considerations and they were foxed.  They were lucky to have drifted aground as it gave them time to get everyone off safely.  In open ocean they probably would have quickly gone down with a lot of people trapped on board or unable to get into the rafts.  Sometimes the only DC lesson you learn is on the prevention side (IE don't let things hit you, and fire prevention is important) or when you are no longer fighting to save the ship.


Offline boot12

  • Member
  • ****
  • 10,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 101
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #53 on: November 22, 2018, 17:27:06 »
Looking at the area in GE, the waterway where they collided, is the almost widest part, Likely they were returning to the naval base at Haakonsvern about 23nm to the south and through much more challenging waters.

location of the tanker terminal at Strue
 60°37'14.52"N   4°51'32.79"E


Location of navy base
 60°20'11.70"N    5°14'18.09"E

***Disclaimer: Lots of speculation below***

I have a suspicion that when the details finally come out regarding this incident that the highlighted part of your statement will end up being seen as a major contributing factor.

The approximate location of the incident is shown below, and about 2 hours north of their home base in Bergen. Given the time of the incident (0400ish local), that would coincide with a speed plan for an early morning close up of Special Sea Dutymen, etc. to come alongside during the forenoon, which leads me to speculate that she was in a steaming watch with no Captain or Navigator awake (or at least on the Bridge). In my experience with the Norwegians, when peacetime sailing there is no ORO on-watch during the night (they typically have one that is designated to be shaken should the need arise), so it's likely that the OOW was the senior person awake at the time.

By the red pin you can see a shoal in an otherwise deep fjord that I suspect the Helge Ingstad was referring to in her VHF calls as to why she didn't want to come to starboard. The channel is approximately 2.0NM wide at that part, which is quite a bit of sea room, especially considering it's home waters for them. For reference, Haro Straits around Turn Point in BC is about 1.6NM wide.

I can't speak to how the Norwegians do risk management. For us, every time a ship has to transit constrained waters, the amount of precautions taken to mitigate risk can range from no change to normal SOPs to full Special Sea Dutymen and Cable Party closed up, with a number of mitigation strategies in between. The captain will make this decision based on a variety of factors both internal and external to the ship.

The RCN from my experience typically gives their subordinate personnel less rope than many allied navies regarding what the OOW or ORO is permitted to do without informing the Captain. Undoubtedly at some point the Norwegian OOW passed a tripwire of when the CO had to be called, although at what point this happened we won't be able to say until the investigation is published. Why the CO was not called early enough to make a decision that would have prevented this collision is likely due to a wide variety of factors related to SOPs, human psychology, organizational culture, etc. that are far too difficult to speculate about.

I am very interested in what the investigation reveals. I can only hope that it is made available as a case study to persons outside of the Norwegian Navy.


Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #54 on: November 22, 2018, 17:48:30 »
Thanks for the chart, what I do find interesting is that from the reports I seen the tanker appears to be on a outbound track nearer to the western side of the channel. I am assuming that the magenta dotted line is their VTS and would assume that outbound on the East and inbound on the west? I would have thought the tanker would have taken an immediate NE course to move over to the eastern side asap, but appears to have turned North almost immediately from leaving berth. The tanker is likely to have called on the traffic channel that she was departing and that should have alerted the bridge crew of the frigate to start planning to set up a passing or crossing situation. As the frigate was as I recall roughly 1.2km offshore, likely they felt the tanker would be further east and therefore didn't pay close attention to her and a typical ARPA radar would have given the frigate crew the ability to determine that the CPA was to tight.   

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 205,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,479
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #55 on: November 22, 2018, 18:06:20 »
Not really, that damage surpassed all DC design considerations and they were foxed.  They were lucky to have drifted aground as it gave them time to get everyone off safely.  In open ocean they probably would have quickly gone down with a lot of people trapped on board or unable to get into the rafts.  Sometimes the only DC lesson you learn is on the prevention side (IE don't let things hit you, and fire prevention is important) or when you are no longer fighting to save the ship.

On that note- I think/assume that when something is going sideways, they basically clsoe up all hatches, render as many individual compartments as possible watertight, no?

If my assumption on that is correct- something catastrophic happens; you've got all these sailors in individual sealed compartments. Having those compartments sealed - some of them presumably being compromised and taking water - what does it then look like if an abandon ship is ordered? Is it not going to speed up things going badly wrong / sinking if not watertightness between compartments is lost? Or at that point is it basically an accepted consequence in a 'sauve qui peut' situation, and whoever can get out gets out versus a more deliberate and controlled evacuation that potentially saves more people at the knowing expense of dooming those in a fe compartments?

Forgive my ignorance, I've never sailed and my worst evacuations have been from an improvised shelter that suddenly have a smoke grenade introduced while I was sleeping. I have no idea what this stuff looks like.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 18:28:35 by Brihard »
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline boot12

  • Member
  • ****
  • 10,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 101
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #56 on: November 22, 2018, 18:26:52 »
Thanks for the chart, what I do find interesting is that from the reports I seen the tanker appears to be on a outbound track nearer to the western side of the channel. I am assuming that the magenta dotted line is their VTS and would assume that outbound on the East and inbound on the west? I would have thought the tanker would have taken an immediate NE course to move over to the eastern side asap, but appears to have turned North almost immediately from leaving berth. The tanker is likely to have called on the traffic channel that she was departing and that should have alerted the bridge crew of the frigate to start planning to set up a passing or crossing situation. As the frigate was as I recall roughly 1.2km offshore, likely they felt the tanker would be further east and therefore didn't pay close attention to her and a typical ARPA radar would have given the frigate crew the ability to determine that the CPA was to tight.

Looking at chart again (free web app should anyone be interested), the magenta dotted lines appear to be just municipal borders and not suggested routing or anything like that.

Typically you would expect the tanker to move to the starboard/eastern side of the channel, yes. However, it looks like the Stura crude port is only about 8NM or so from the western exit of the fjord taking them to open ocean. If the Helge Ingstad wasn't up on AIS (and possibly not participating in the traffic reporting scheme), the local pilot on the tanker may not expected any opposing traffic and just suggested to take the most direct route towards the pilot station rather than adding an extra 25% distance by moving over to the starboard side.

Additionally, AIS can be hampered quite severely by proximity to land and terrain which blocks the signal (happens all the time in Halifax harbour), so it's quite possible that the Ingstad didn't see for a while if they missed the departure calls on VHF to VTMS.

Again, with incomplete details, it seems obvious to me that ideally the frigate hears the call to VTMS, picks up either the AIS track or radar paint well in advance, and manoeuvers with ample time to port to see the tanker Green to Green (likely with a call to the tanker to explain their intentions). Obviously this didn't happen, and we'll have to wait and see what the investigation reveals.

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 24,205
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 746
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #57 on: November 22, 2018, 20:27:47 »
You can listen to the audio of the calls between the Ingstad and the tanker, and see the radar tracks here;

https://medium.com/@cargun/radar-images-audio-log-of-knm-helge-ingstad-frigate-sola-ts-oil-tanker-collision-a71e3f516b54

The tanker called them and told them they needed to maneuver well before the collision, so it's not like they came out of nowhere.  The sounds of the guy's voice when he calls in and tells the shore control he hit a warship was every dad that has told their kid not to be a dumbass, then they do it anyway.


Brihard, to answer your question, the sailor trapped in a space flooding/on fire is normally table topped with the CO, but one of the reasons why we have a list of where everyone is supposed to be at any emergency station (based around who is on/off watch) and check it when we go to emergency stations.  Having to make the decision to possibly close a hatch to stop flooding to lose the ship always kept me up at night as the DC guy.  This is actually happened during the USN Fitzgerald collision.  Pretty heartbreaking, but particularly as one of the guys went back in to try and get a few people out of the messdeck that had flooded. The NPR did a good report on it here; https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/09/06/548718231/a-heros-story-from-the-scramble-to-survive-on-the-uss-fitzgerald

It's a judgement call that could be made by the sailors on the scene, or from up the chain, but would be a pretty extreme flood.

Generally though, commercial and naval ships have a manual of stability that gives you your stability for a bunch of different intact scenarios, as well as if you are damaged. They give you a number of starting points (light on fuel, fully loaded, etc), run through a bunch of theoretical damage scenarios, and tell you if you pass/fail a few key stability criteria. You'll never hit it exactly, but gives you a good idea if you are still safe, and also has some suggestions for ways to make it better. It's a lot of 'what ifs' but better than trying to do the math when you are in the middle of an emergency, so pretty useful.

In this case, once they got their initial response, figured out what was going on, and had an idea of the damage and rate of flooding, you should be able to open up the book, find a matching scenario, and see if you were okay.  With that much damage, they probably had major flooding in a number of adjacent compartments with some other aggravating factors, blew their reserve stability, and were foxed.  I'm sure they probably did as much as they could to slow it down to get everyone off safely, but if the water comes in faster than you can get it off, you can only do so much.  Once you list over far enough, vents and exhausts start downflooding, so it gets worse.

We practice all this stuff, but the 'abandon ship' drill is something that is only ever done once a blue moon, (and even then it's a walkthrough) so impressive that everyone made it off safely given the extent of the damage and the injuries.

Can't really say anything about the watchkeeping, but this was a pretty professional response to what is a literal worse case scenario, so impressed from that perspective.  People will likely lose their jobs over this, but surprised no one was killed given how bad it was.


Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 183,976
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,024
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #58 on: November 23, 2018, 07:28:01 »
As a navigation systems guy (W Eng SONAR background - we fix nav gear too) this article has given me cause to consider whether or not there were 'other factors' at play as well:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/13/russia-accused-of-jamming-gps-signals-during-major-nato-wargames/

Additionally, knowing how our GPS and other systems have performed in Vestfjorden once upon a time (I was summoned to the bridge by the NAVO 'at the double' because our ship's course/track on the SHINNADS system was not a line, it was a square-tooth wave pattern) I would be curious to see what the chart notes indicate about GPS performance in the area.

Our 'squaretooth track' was caused by interference from a large overhead high-voltage power cable that passed OVER the Fjord - and due to the angles/elevations of the mountains, we were not getting good satellite coverage anyhow.  I read the chart notes - showed it to the NAVO, and he learned...

NS
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 07:31:36 by NavyShooter »
Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #59 on: November 23, 2018, 10:03:54 »
The radar imagery and the AIS data explains why the tanker was closer to the west, the tanker was doing 7kts and had two over taking vessels on it's Starboard quarter doing around 12kts. Interesting choice on the magenta lines, same colour used here for traffic control markings. what was the weather like, was visibility obscured?

Here is the AIS tracks the frigate appears at :18 seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=izbXbQ1Shmk

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,361
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #60 on: November 24, 2018, 06:58:37 »
As a navigation systems guy (W Eng SONAR background - we fix nav gear too) this article has given me cause to consider whether or not there were 'other factors' at play as well:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/13/russia-accused-of-jamming-gps-signals-during-major-nato-wargames/

Additionally, knowing how our GPS and other systems have performed in Vestfjorden once upon a time (I was summoned to the bridge by the NAVO 'at the double' because our ship's course/track on the SHINNADS system was not a line, it was a square-tooth wave pattern) I would be curious to see what the chart notes indicate about GPS performance in the area.

Our 'squaretooth track' was caused by interference from a large overhead high-voltage power cable that passed OVER the Fjord - and due to the angles/elevations of the mountains, we were not getting good satellite coverage anyhow. I read the chart notes - showed it to the NAVO, and he learned...

NS


And both are common problems ... the first, RF interference from non-traditional or unanticipated sources, is increasing as infrastructure develops everywhere, and the second, the limitations of satellite services in Northern (and Southern) latitudes, is well known (and taught) but is, unsurprisingly, sometimes a surprise to individual users who encounter it for the first time.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 896
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #61 on: November 24, 2018, 08:15:24 »

And both are common problems ... the first, RF interference from non-traditional or unanticipated sources, is increasing as infrastructure develops everywhere, and the second, the limitations of satellite services in Northern (and Southern) latitudes, is well known (and taught) but is, unsurprisingly, sometimes a surprise to individual users who encounter it for the first time.

There is a solution to all this.  LOOK OUT THE DAMN WINDOW!  This is why lighting is so important on ships.  Why fog signals and such are so important on ships.  Why a backup paper chart is so important and knowing how to do a visual fix.  There is no reason besides human error that this collision happened based on current information.  None.

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 171,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,051
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #62 on: November 24, 2018, 08:26:46 »
There is a solution to all this.  LOOK OUT THE DAMN WINDOW!  This is why lighting is so important on ships.  Why fog signals and such are so important on ships.  Why a backup paper chart is so important and knowing how to do a visual fix.  There is no reason besides human error that this collision happened based on current information.  None.

Do ships have backup paper charts and is visual fixing still taught for pilotage?
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 896
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #63 on: November 24, 2018, 10:09:28 »
Do ships have backup paper charts and is visual fixing still taught for pilotage?

Yes.  Very much so.  HMCS TORONTO experienced a 5+ hour power outage off the coast of Ireland just last month.  Paper charts were definitely used.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,743
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #64 on: November 24, 2018, 11:03:48 »
Yes.  Very much so.  HMCS TORONTO experienced a 5+ hour power outage off the coast of Ireland just last month.  Paper charts were definitely used.

Good to hear!!

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #65 on: November 25, 2018, 16:30:41 »
As a navigation systems guy (W Eng SONAR background - we fix nav gear too) this article has given me cause to consider whether or not there were 'other factors' at play as well:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/13/russia-accused-of-jamming-gps-signals-during-major-nato-wargames/

Additionally, knowing how our GPS and other systems have performed in Vestfjorden once upon a time (I was summoned to the bridge by the NAVO 'at the double' because our ship's course/track on the SHINNADS system was not a line, it was a square-tooth wave pattern) I would be curious to see what the chart notes indicate about GPS performance in the area.

Our 'squaretooth track' was caused by interference from a large overhead high-voltage power cable that passed OVER the Fjord - and due to the angles/elevations of the mountains, we were not getting good satellite coverage anyhow.  I read the chart notes - showed it to the NAVO, and he learned...

NS

Several places on the west coast where this is evident, along with oddball magnetic variations spots. Going up the Fraser at 30kts in the fog at night in a Hovercraft, we knew the buoy under the powerlines would not show on the radar, along with any other targets. I was around for Loran C, early GPS, differential GPS and even had to learn Decca and plotting CPA's on a radar screen with grease pencils. 

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,365
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 252
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #67 on: November 30, 2018, 07:44:43 »
Initial assessments are out, some possible watertight integrity concerns with the design/builder. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/11/29/early-report-blames-confused-watchstanders-possible-design-flaws-for-norways-sunken-frigate/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+DFN&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR2Vg1dhXHNqhwDYjuCN0dcJM7BAsvVlOmz0YlB5_8iY9MpOyVyaXE2l40w

From the link above:
"a pair of warnings that the issues that sunk Ingstad could also apply to other Navantia ships, raising questions about a widespread quality issue at the Spanish shipbuilder.

“The AIBN has found safety critical issues relating to the vessel’s watertight compartments,” the report reads. “This must be assumed to also apply to the other four Nansen-class frigates.

“It cannot be excluded that the same applies to vessels of a similar design delivered by Navantia, or that the design concept continues to be used for similar vessel models."

Isn't Navantia one of the three finalists for the Halifax replacement programme?

Haven't some recently speculated that if BAE Systems/Lockheed disqualified and the Dutch design penalized for launching the lawsuit  that Navantia might just squeak through as the winner?  We might want to be rethinking this in light of the above findings.....

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 42,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,641
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #68 on: November 30, 2018, 20:44:55 »
This  Russian tweeter feed, besides having having some interesting shots of Russian military equipment, also has some imagery of the Norwegian attempts to recover the Helge Ingstad.

https://twitter.com/iren_maxx
"Leave one wolf alive, and the sheep are never safe."

Arya Stark

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,202
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,838
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #69 on: December 01, 2018, 08:40:02 »
Yes.  Very much so.  HMCS TORONTO experienced a 5+ hour power outage off the coast of Ireland just last month.  Paper charts were definitely used.

For what it's worth, in the civillian shipping world at least, ships can be exempt from carrying paper charts with the latest generation of ECDIS systems when appropriately redundant.

Offline JMCanada

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #70 on: December 03, 2018, 19:34:25 »
4-6 watertight bulkheads if my guess is right.  Tough to survive that.  The progressive flooding would be to much for the crew to handle.  Brutal.

Going back to the preliminary report, I have read in some spanish forum:
https://www.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?action=read&id=1543582172.57417&user=morato

- the norwegian frigates were designed with a reinforced hull, bulkheads and watertight compartments to some extent as for some ice capabilities (no mention of the ice thickness) as well as to withstand mines from WWII.

- design and requisites were approved by norwegian authorities as well as by a british company hired by them as 3rd party (consultant). The frigates passed all tests to the satisfaction of both, who also scrutinized the whole manufacturing process.

- from the report: "The investigation is therefore demanding in terms of time and resources. The AIBN stresses that this is a preliminary report and that it may consequently contain some errors and inaccuracies. Because of considerations relating to the duty of confidentiality, classified material and the investigation process, the AIBN does not publish all its information at the present time."

- in any case, there are still 4 more Nansen frigates to be checked about tightening and maintenance. Once inspected, it could be determined if the lack of tightness is prior or subsequent to the collision.

In this newspaper we can find more (in spanish): https://www.abc.es/espana/abci-diseno-fragata-noruega-no-influyo-hundimiento-201812020257_noticia.html
[using google translator]: There is clear evidence that the initial damage was extended to four watertight compartments and indications that there could have been five really damaged in the collision, which exceeds the survival criteria of the design of the ship. "


I have to admit I might have some bias in favour of Navantia since I was born in Spain, that being said, I am a civilian only, passionate about warships and so, but in no way related to Navantia, never worked for them or subsidiaries.

Edited: I have removed the link because the picture is no longer there.

« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 01:56:13 by JMCanada »

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,026
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #71 on: December 03, 2018, 20:45:07 »
This  Russian tweeter feed, besides having having some interesting shots of Russian military equipment, also has some imagery of the Norwegian attempts to recover the Helge Ingstad.

https://twitter.com/iren_maxx

Really great pics in many aspects. The BUK launch sequence was instructive- made notes. Also, the night time air to air refuelling shots were quite well done.
Seems also that Syrian* Iranian SU22’s were refreshed and updated. Treasure trove, really.

*thanks JM.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 10:32:40 by whiskey601 »
Living the lean life.

Offline Uzlu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 153
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #72 on: December 07, 2018, 08:10:39 »
Quote
Spanish Shipyard Says Norwegian Navy 'Passes the Buck' Over Sunken Frigate

While the Norwegian Navy has taken urgent measures abroad for the peers of the sunken frigate KNM Helge Ingstad to prevent inundation, the Spanish shipyard that manufactured the hapless warship has accused the Norwegian authorities of looking for excuses.

Following an interim report by the Norwegian accident investigation commission, which blamed technical errors in waterproof bulkheads on board the KNM Helge Ingstad that sank after a collision with an oil tanker while returning from NATO drills, the Norwegian Navy has completed temporary measures to prevent rapid inundation of warships of the same class in the event of similar collisions, the tabloid daily Verdens Gang reported.

The Defence Material Agency said inflatable belts were installed as a temporary solution to seal the hollow propeller shaft in order to prevent water from entering the frigate's engine room in case of an emergency.

According to the report, which blamed the frigate's rapid sinking on a construction error, saltwater first penetrated the generator room of the KNM Helge Ingstad, before spreading to other rooms and finally reaching the engine room.

"All the [Nansen-class] frigates are built in the same way. The Navy has implemented interim measures on three out of four frigates", Steinar Nilsen, maritime chief at the Defence Material Agency told Verdens Gang.

The fourth frigate, the flagship KNM Fridjof Nansen is currently in the process of a major, planned maintenance. The vessel will receive inflatable belts when it is re-launched in April next year.

However, the claims of the warships being less waterproof than stated made the Spanish shipyard that manufactured the Nansen-class frigates, currently considered the backbone of the Norwegian Navy, see red.

"We have never received such complaints ever before. Not even once", Navantia Shipyard official and union leader Javier Galán told national Norwegian broadcaster NRK.

He dispelled the Norwegian Navy's allegations of a faulty construction of the propeller shaft being the culprit.

"Had the shaft leaked water in this way, it would have become obvious far earlier. Also, the frigate would have sunk long ago", Galán said.

According to him, the propeller shaft must have been damaged during the collision itself, which is the only explanation why water appeared between the sections altogether.

"Imagine you have a car. Even if it's a good one, it will run into problems if you crash it", Galán said.

Galán blamed erroneous navigation, venturing that the crew had misinterpreted the lights from the Maltese-flagged tanker Sola TS, mistaking it for solid land.

"I believe the only thing they are looking for is cop-outs. The way I see it, it's just passing the buck. The crew should have avoided the collision", Galán said.

Navantia issued a statement ensuring that the Nansen-class frigates shipped between 2006 and 2011 to the tune of NOK 21 billion ($2.5 billion), fulfilled all technical requirements before handed over to Norway. Meanwhile, Galán stressed that the accusations may lead to the company's reputation being damaged, which is the fifth-largest in Europe and ninth-largest internationally.

"We are an international company. And this makes a terrible damage, because it leaves an impression that we are unable to make ships. Even though we have been doing it for centuries", Galán said.

Navantia dates back to military shipyards established by the Spanish crown in 1730. Over centuries, it has gone through several name changes, the recent one in 2005. It is 100 percent owned by a government holding.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201812071070473716-norway-frigate-spain-shipyard/

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #73 on: December 08, 2018, 02:12:45 »
Article on raising her with a link about the missiles being removed by navy divers https://forsvaret.no/presse/fregatt-i-sammenst%C3%B8t-med-annet-fart%C3%B8y/heving-helgeingstad

Offline Uzlu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 153
Re: Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad
« Reply #74 on: December 11, 2018, 07:54:18 »
From the link above:
"a pair of warnings that the issues that sunk Ingstad could also apply to other Navantia ships, raising questions about a widespread quality issue at the Spanish shipbuilder.

“The AIBN has found safety critical issues relating to the vessel’s watertight compartments,” the report reads. “This must be assumed to also apply to the other four Nansen-class frigates.

“It cannot be excluded that the same applies to vessels of a similar design delivered by Navantia, or that the design concept continues to be used for similar vessel models."

Isn't Navantia one of the three finalists for the Halifax replacement programme?

Haven't some recently speculated that if BAE Systems/Lockheed disqualified and the Dutch design penalized for launching the lawsuit  that Navantia might just squeak through as the winner?  We might want to be rethinking this in light of the above findings.....
If flawed, might it also be in the De Zeven Provinciën-class frigates?
Quote
The Netherlands, Germany and Spain set up the trilateral frigate agreement for the national construction of frigates. In addition to the De Zeven Provincien, the F100 (Alvaro de Bazan) is being built in Spain by Navantia and the F124 (Sachsen) built in Germany by ARGE F124 (Blohme and Voss, HDW and Thyssen Nordseewerke). The cooperation extends to the ship platform and not to the systems.
https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/dezeven/