Minelayers
- Thread starter Ths
- Start date
contedicavour
New Member
The Scandinavian navies have a habit of building big (100-meter long) minelayers and of using them as training ships or even flagships.This is one of many subjects I don't know enough about:
Anybody with a perspective on what the biggest minelayer are/have been?
How much space does a mine take on a minedeck?
Any insight will be appreciated.
The Swedish Carlskrona is 106 meters long, 3600 tonnes full load, 105 mines aboard.
The Finnish navy has the 2 Hameenmaa (77 meters, 1330 t, 150 mines on 4 rails) and the Pohjanmaa (78 meters, 1100 t, 120 mines on 2 rails).
Elsewhere I don't remember navies building dedicated minelayers... though the Baltic Sea is a very peculiar environment...
cheers
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3
Conte di Cavour:
Thank You very much for the information!
That was hy there was interest in having the Finns join Nato - now it seems like we will have to do our dirty work ourselves.
Special enviroment: You can believe it: American and British admirals get scared stiff at the though of risking their precious ships there.
Thank You very much for the information!
That was hy there was interest in having the Finns join Nato - now it seems like we will have to do our dirty work ourselves.
Special enviroment: You can believe it: American and British admirals get scared stiff at the though of risking their precious ships there.
contedicavour
New Member
What areas would the Indian navy think of mining in case of war ? With oceans all around I would think the usefulness of mines as being limited... :unknown unless you would consider feasible approaching the weakly armed Polnochnys to Karachi harbour
cheers
The RAN Huon Class is based on the Italian Gaeta class, with the standard aussie mods, u know, beer, barbie and Cricket on the Tv.
They were built locally at Newcastle, so the job was on time and well constructed.
Stats
Displacement 720 tonnes
Length 52.5 metres
Beam 9.9 metres
Draught 4.87 metres
Ships Company 39
Propulsion 1 x 1460kw Fincantieri GMT Diesel - (Single shaft)
APU’s 3 x 124kw Electro-hydraulic motors
Speed 14 knots (main engine)
Weapon Systems One 30 mm DS30B rapid fire cannon.
Two .50 calibre machine guns.
Two SUTEC Double Eagle mine disposal vehicles.
Mine Countermeasures GEC Marconi 2093 variable depth Sonar
Two SUTEC Double Eagle Mine Disposal Vehicles with DAMDIC Mine Disposal Charge
Clearance Diving equipment & Cowan two compartment recompression chamber
Oropesa mechanical sweep
Capable of towing AMASS Influence Sweep
http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/mhc.html
They were built locally at Newcastle, so the job was on time and well constructed.
Stats
Displacement 720 tonnes
Length 52.5 metres
Beam 9.9 metres
Draught 4.87 metres
Ships Company 39
Propulsion 1 x 1460kw Fincantieri GMT Diesel - (Single shaft)
APU’s 3 x 124kw Electro-hydraulic motors
Speed 14 knots (main engine)
Weapon Systems One 30 mm DS30B rapid fire cannon.
Two .50 calibre machine guns.
Two SUTEC Double Eagle mine disposal vehicles.
Mine Countermeasures GEC Marconi 2093 variable depth Sonar
Two SUTEC Double Eagle Mine Disposal Vehicles with DAMDIC Mine Disposal Charge
Clearance Diving equipment & Cowan two compartment recompression chamber
Oropesa mechanical sweep
Capable of towing AMASS Influence Sweep
http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/mhc.html
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7
Well, so far it seem the Danish capability to lay mines is rather unique. One thing is to drop a few mines under the cover of darkness. The Danish minelayers seems to be able to lay mines under fire - at least some.
As I've mentioned before railferries are quite good as well, though not under fire.
As I've mentioned before railferries are quite good as well, though not under fire.
there are two types of mine warfares ,they are offensive mining and defensive mining.What areas would the Indian navy think of mining in case of war ? With oceans all around I would think the usefulness of mines as being limited... :unknown unless you would consider feasible approaching the weakly armed Polnochnys to Karachi harbour
cheers
defensive mining means ,mining ones own naval bases (leaving a few heavily guarded safe passages for friendly ships to pass) to prevent the enemy ships from coming close,an example of this is the mining of the indian naval base in vizag on the east coast which resulted in the sinking of the pakistani submarine pns ghazi as it tried to aproach the vizag naval base in order to sink the indian aircraft carreier ins vikrant believed to have been docked there(a decoy).
india can carry out protective mining within its own terriotery of mumbai and karwar on the west coast(major naval bases),the gulf of kutch of the gujarat coast(oil rich area which borders pakistani province of sindh),lakshadweep islands ,andaman and nicobar islands (strategically important as they are the headquarters of the andaman and nicobar joint services command),the 24 parganas (a group of 24 islands bordering bangldesh),and the palk straits (a narrow sea upto 20 kms in width between india and sri lanka).
offensive mining means, using mines to block enemies sea lanes of communications and the approaches to enemie's harbours,there by restricting the movement of enemy ships,the likely choke points are karachi in pakistan,the whole of bangladesh ,and sri lanka,this can result in a severe economic loss and resulting in anti mine warfare by the affected nation.
the mine ships are generally very lightly armed vessels and hence have to be frequently disguised as merchant vessels to approach the enemy terriotery,however more common method is escorting a mine ship floatilla with a couple of corvettes or frigates or submarines.
the polnochniy class of mine counter measure vessels are more heavily armed than your average mine launching vessels.these 1200 ton vessels are equipped with 2 twin ak230 30mm gun systems and two 18 tube wm18 rocket launchers and the crew also carry shoulder fired igla surface to air missiles.
alternately submarines and patrol aircrafts can also be used for mining roles.
each indian kilo class submarines can carry 24 dm1 mines in place of torpedoes.
retired foxtrot class of submarines(if still in sea worthy condition) can be used for defensve minelaying within indian coastal waters as they can carry upto 44 mines each in place of torpedoes.
each shishumar class of submarines in the indian navy(hdw type 209 class ) can carry upto 24 mines of the external strap on type.
i believe even the scorpenes can carry external strap on type of mines.
retired foxtrot class of submarines(if still in sea worthy condition) can be used for defensve minelaying within indian coastal waters as they can carry upto 44 mines each in place of torpedoes.
each shishumar class of submarines in the indian navy(hdw type 209 class ) can carry upto 24 mines of the external strap on type.
i believe even the scorpenes can carry external strap on type of mines.
contedicavour
New Member
Yes these are very good minehunters/sweepers, but not minelayers. Very few countries build dedicated minelayers.
cheers
contedicavour
New Member
OK thks. I definitively see SSKs running offensive mining, as they are much harder to detect. Surface ships would come under heavy fire by enemy air force, unless the Indian minelayers were escorted by a carrier strike group.
cheers
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #12
Well to theose interested: A short rundown on minewarfare in the Baltic.
For a century naval warfare in the Baltic has revolved around the issue of mines in general and the Danish straits in particular.
At the opening of WW1 the Belts were closed promptly (you could sneak past the mines in Øresund going close to the Swedish side, but not with ships of any draught). This was a significant factor keeping Denmark out of WW1 - and removing the Kings constitutional right to declare war.
The Germans wanted to keep the British from attacking the German Baltic coast and the British wanted to keep the German Baltic fleet precisely that.
The Russians never ventured out of port and the British foiled an attempt to force the bay of Riga by the Germans with the simple expedient of submarines.
At the outbreak of WW2 the mines were not laid though there was time for it - it served no purpose, as the British had rejected coming to our aid about 2 years before. It was actually the very same mines that had been used during WW1 and they supplied the resistance with limited amounts of explosive in the period before the aerial supply set in late in the war.
After WW2 the British had given up on stopping the Soviet fleet in the Belts and planned to take it out between Denmark and Norway. With the Nato-membership of Germany the position bettered dramatically, as not only The Great Belt could be mined, but also Fehmarn Belt between Denmark and Germany. That was the background for the Falster-class of big minelayers. There was even a third minefield planned north of the Great Belt between Kalundborg and Århus. The Niels Iuel class is build to defend these minefields from the preliminary sweeping attemps that would have been nescessary before trying to force the waters with major units. There were even plans for sowing mines with B-52 - probably because it seemed such a pity not to continue annoying the WAPA even if/when Denmark fell in the event of war.
Today the main problem is the mines laid during 2 world wars. AFAIR about 60.000.
The current issue is mining the entries to St. Petersburg and Königsberg. To this purpose the Absalon class has been build. These - the biggest ships in the Danish navy ever - have been designated L for assault; but are in reality primarely minelayers and should have been named M.
There are about 4000 mines left over from the cold war, so the means are at hand.
The new patrol frigates of the Danish Navy - in building - are probably for the protection of these minefields.
The Baltic is distinctly not suited to use aircraft carriers in - and the new Baltic states will probably function as an unsinkable carrier. Note: The Royal Danish airforce has approximately the size of one carrier in number and composition of aircraft.
For a century naval warfare in the Baltic has revolved around the issue of mines in general and the Danish straits in particular.
At the opening of WW1 the Belts were closed promptly (you could sneak past the mines in Øresund going close to the Swedish side, but not with ships of any draught). This was a significant factor keeping Denmark out of WW1 - and removing the Kings constitutional right to declare war.
The Germans wanted to keep the British from attacking the German Baltic coast and the British wanted to keep the German Baltic fleet precisely that.
The Russians never ventured out of port and the British foiled an attempt to force the bay of Riga by the Germans with the simple expedient of submarines.
At the outbreak of WW2 the mines were not laid though there was time for it - it served no purpose, as the British had rejected coming to our aid about 2 years before. It was actually the very same mines that had been used during WW1 and they supplied the resistance with limited amounts of explosive in the period before the aerial supply set in late in the war.
After WW2 the British had given up on stopping the Soviet fleet in the Belts and planned to take it out between Denmark and Norway. With the Nato-membership of Germany the position bettered dramatically, as not only The Great Belt could be mined, but also Fehmarn Belt between Denmark and Germany. That was the background for the Falster-class of big minelayers. There was even a third minefield planned north of the Great Belt between Kalundborg and Århus. The Niels Iuel class is build to defend these minefields from the preliminary sweeping attemps that would have been nescessary before trying to force the waters with major units. There were even plans for sowing mines with B-52 - probably because it seemed such a pity not to continue annoying the WAPA even if/when Denmark fell in the event of war.
Today the main problem is the mines laid during 2 world wars. AFAIR about 60.000.
The current issue is mining the entries to St. Petersburg and Königsberg. To this purpose the Absalon class has been build. These - the biggest ships in the Danish navy ever - have been designated L for assault; but are in reality primarely minelayers and should have been named M.
There are about 4000 mines left over from the cold war, so the means are at hand.
The new patrol frigates of the Danish Navy - in building - are probably for the protection of these minefields.
The Baltic is distinctly not suited to use aircraft carriers in - and the new Baltic states will probably function as an unsinkable carrier. Note: The Royal Danish airforce has approximately the size of one carrier in number and composition of aircraft.
contedicavour
New Member
I wonder how efficient the Russian Natya, Yevgenya, etc MCM ships are. They are sure to have a lot of work if the above scenario were to materialize. They would have to clear a path from Konigsberg and St Petersburg out into the Baltic Sea to be able to isolate the 3 Baltic republics from NATO naval reinforcements.
cheers
cheers
I visited our MCM force in Kappeln some years ago and they showed us how they do their daily minesweeping operations.
It is impressing to see how many active mines are still in place from WWII especially in the waters of the baltic states.
And if you now see how slow and difficult minesweeping is and how vulnerable the MCMs are I really doubt that any baltic sea nation is able to protect their MCMs in case of war if they have to operate some miles away of their bases.
It is impressing to see how many active mines are still in place from WWII especially in the waters of the baltic states.
And if you now see how slow and difficult minesweeping is and how vulnerable the MCMs are I really doubt that any baltic sea nation is able to protect their MCMs in case of war if they have to operate some miles away of their bases.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #15
Conte di Cavour:
That is precisely the case.
The reinforcement scenario of the 3 Baltic nations creates a 2 front scenario for the Russians. A Baltic front will no matter what tie up considerable forces.
Two minelayers, comparatively cheap, will force the Baltiskaya Flot into vast investments in mineclearing, annual cost in training - all with a very "iffy" effect. Just think of the investment in stealth corvettes - in itself an admission of the untenability of oceanic ambition.
That is precisely the case.
The reinforcement scenario of the 3 Baltic nations creates a 2 front scenario for the Russians. A Baltic front will no matter what tie up considerable forces.
Two minelayers, comparatively cheap, will force the Baltiskaya Flot into vast investments in mineclearing, annual cost in training - all with a very "iffy" effect. Just think of the investment in stealth corvettes - in itself an admission of the untenability of oceanic ambition.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #16
http://forsvaret.dk/NR/rdonlyres/168526A1-8072-4936-B67B-EA18C3EC79FA/0/PræsentationafskibMKIEndeligVersion.pdf
http://forsvaret.dk/NR/rdonlyres/44105E71-7476-4DEE-8DC2-23390F1B9B58/0/PræsentationafskibMKIIEndeligVersion.pdf
Well these links might interest You, Waylander.
the Danish navy makes their minesweepers remotely controlled - with callsigns and everything - and build spares. Sort of the bigamist letting his wifes enter the minefield before him.
http://forsvaret.dk/NR/rdonlyres/44105E71-7476-4DEE-8DC2-23390F1B9B58/0/PræsentationafskibMKIIEndeligVersion.pdf
Well these links might interest You, Waylander.
the Danish navy makes their minesweepers remotely controlled - with callsigns and everything - and build spares. Sort of the bigamist letting his wifes enter the minefield before him.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #18
Waylander: Living in Slesvig-Holsten ...
There are drones; but that is not the point. These ships are minesweepers using a general mould for many different types of ships - survey and torpedo recovery among other thing - all the little odd jobs a navy has.
1. The SWEEPERs can be controlled remotely.
2. The other in the class can be quickly modified to be a minesweeper - and controlled remotely.
3. Plus as I understand it they are quite cheap to build.
So as far as I understand it:
Mount the gear on the boats send them - saying "OUCH" everytime one flies skyhigh - send in the next (saves a lot of writing to next of kin). When you run out of them:
1. A repeat rush order to Fåborg Yarcht Yard.
2. Take the ones used for - say fisheries inspection - in danish waters, plug it in and send it on its way.
Sort of takes a leaf out the SOP of a South American air force, where - when somebody obviously did not grasp the finer details of domestic policy - put on a demonstration using their Hunters to sink som unmanned floats. The Air Force only lost a couple of jets to the inert targets.
There are drones; but that is not the point. These ships are minesweepers using a general mould for many different types of ships - survey and torpedo recovery among other thing - all the little odd jobs a navy has.
1. The SWEEPERs can be controlled remotely.
2. The other in the class can be quickly modified to be a minesweeper - and controlled remotely.
3. Plus as I understand it they are quite cheap to build.
So as far as I understand it:
Mount the gear on the boats send them - saying "OUCH" everytime one flies skyhigh - send in the next (saves a lot of writing to next of kin). When you run out of them:
1. A repeat rush order to Fåborg Yarcht Yard.
2. Take the ones used for - say fisheries inspection - in danish waters, plug it in and send it on its way.
Sort of takes a leaf out the SOP of a South American air force, where - when somebody obviously did not grasp the finer details of domestic policy - put on a demonstration using their Hunters to sink som unmanned floats. The Air Force only lost a couple of jets to the inert targets.