Showing posts with label naval. Show all posts
Showing posts with label naval. Show all posts

Friday, 22 June 2012

Greece and Turkey: Offensive and Defensive Balance of Naval Power in 2012


The Greek and Turkish naval forces are two of NATO’s strongest and most experienced. The chronic antagonism between the two neighboring states has meant that their naval crews and officer corps have been trained and simulated wartime situations. The Greek Navy in particular has a longer tradition in maritime affairs due to the prevalence of a merchant marine culture and the numerous Islands, archipelagos and long stretches of coastline.

While Turkey also has a considerable coastline on three sides, it has traditionally had a much more continental orientation whereas Greece has traditionally looked to the sea. For example, during the rule of the Ottoman Turks, it was noted that the majority of their navy was manned by Greeks, while Turkish officers and soldiers were more effective serving in the land forces.

The following detailed report breaks down the inventory of these rival-but-allied naval forces for the year 2012. It also reveals that equilibrium of power has been established; the two countries have, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, reached an equal projection of naval power, something that partly depends on the threat perceptions military planners have regarding different fronts.

We expect this dynamic to remain as it is, at least for the mid-term, though pending acquisitions by Turkey could affect the balance in future. On the Aegean Sea front in particular, Greece for the time being enjoys a small level of superiority, since the Turkish Navy has obligations in the Black Sea as well, and it is considered that these forces would not be able to reach the Aegean in case of war, due to the difficulty in passing through the Bosporus Straits and Hellespontos without risking heavy casualties from the Greek air force, not to mention slowdowns due to the heavy presence of international maritime shipping in the Straits.

All data presented below derives from official information gathered from the Greek and Turkish Naval inventories, available in the archives of their respective military staffs and defense ministries.

History of Engagements and Balance of Power

The Greek Navy has a long tradition and, according to this, it has never been defeated in combat. Judging by its size, inventory and training it can be said that Greece’s navy is one of the most important world naval powers today. The Turkish Navy has traditionally had a more inward outlook and has been given a lower profile in the general heriarchy of the Turkish armed forces, where the Army and the Air Force had always had a much more important impact. However, the size and NATO-standard training of Turkey’s navy makes it one of the largest in the world.

The other top naval forces in the world today are the USA, UK, France, Russia, China, Japan, Australia, Italy, Germany and India.

The Greek Navy has a long history of battle experience and engagement, which has (as said), always tended to end victoriously. Since the establishment of the modern Greek state in 1830, there were war deployments in the Cretan War (1866-69), Greek-Turkish War (1897), the First and Second Balkan Wars (1912-13), and soon after in the First World War (1916-18). The navy was also used in Ukraine in 1919 and then in the spillover conflict with Turkey- the Asia Minor conflict (1920-22), which was in fact lost by the land forces in Anatolia.

The navy was again deployed in the Second World War (1940-1944) and in the domestic continuation of that conflict, the Greek Civil War (1946-1949). Moreover Greek Navy participated in the Cyprus armed conflicts between 1963, 64 and 1974. It is important to remember too that in several of these conflicts, such as WWII, Greek resistance utilized the local knowledge of fishermen and islanders, or particular related talents (such as the extraordinary ability of the sponge divers of Kalymnos to hold their breath for long periods underwater) to obtain a tactical advantage over numerically superior forces. (For a “true fiction” account of this sort of evasive action, see the literary memoir of Alexis Ladas, Falconera, published by Lycabettus Press in Athens).

While the Ottoman Navy’s most famous naval endeavors in Greek waters ended up in catastrophic defeat – such as the 1571 Battle of Lepanto, against the Holy League, and the 1827 Battle of Navarino, against the combined forces of France, Britain and Russia – the Turkish Navy is considered to have started from the time when modern Turkey became a state, in 1923.

Since Turkey was neutral in WWII, it was only employed in the Cyprus invasion (1974). However, as has been noted, both Greece and Turkey have (since 1974 and especially since the mid-1980s) been engaging in certain naval incidents that spill over into crises as was the case in 1976, 1987 and 1996, maritime showdowns that mostly involved the navies and coast guards of both countries. Some interesting insights on the maritime engagements of 1987 and 1996, and the military intelligence factors that influenced them, can be gleaned from Panagiotis Dimitrakis’ Greek Military Intelligence and the Crescent (reviewed by Balkanalysis.com here).

Other (Recent) Peacekeeping or Non-Hostile Engagements

It should be remembered that as NATO allies, both Turkey and Greece have a history of participating in NATO and UN peacekeeping missions. Furthermore, Greece hosts an important naval NATO base, at Souda Bay in northwestern Crete. This base and its Maritime Interdiction Center are regularly used for multinational training exercises, as well as for allied operations (for example, in summer 2011 Souda Bay was used as a base for aerial assaults on Gaddafi’s Libya by foreign pilots). At about the same time, training activities at the Interdiction Center could be interpreted to tell which North African governments would survive the “Arab Spring”- for example, the presence of Morocco in training exercises during the Libya campaign indicated that the kingdom’s leadership would escape the fates of Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan regimes.

Notable peacekeeping missions in which the Greek Navy has participated occurred in areas such as the Indian Ocean, Adriatic Sea and Eastern Mediterranean, and near specific countries such as Lebanon, Cyprus, Albania, Somalia and Mauritania. For its part, Turkey has also contributed naval support to most of the same places.

Navy Standing Personnel

The Greek Navy has 12,800 officers and petty officers; 2,400 professional mates, 3,000 national service mates and 10,000 reserves. Turkey has larger human capacities, with 20,000 officers and petty officers; 35,000 national service mates and 55,000 reserves.

Although Turkish naval personnel numbers are higher, the two countries differ in terms of their composition of privates. Greece has historically invested in recruiting professional personnel, while Turkey relies more on conscripts. In terms of naval training, both navies are NATO-trained but Greece enjoys the advantage of having an ideal sea region in which to exercise (the Aegean and Ionian Seas), which offer substantial training advantages due to the changing weather conditions, the thousands of islands and islets and the proximity with the mainland where multiple battle scenarios can be drafted and then tested. By contrast, Turkey’s Black Sea and Mediterranean Sea regions are largely bereft of islands, while their room to maneuver in the Aegean is severely constrained due to the proximity of Greek territory up and down much of the Anatolian coast.

The Greek Navy occasionally trains alongside those of the USA, UK, Israel, Holland and France. Such partners also view the Greek seas as good training regions. Lastly, it has to be noted than in case of war, all merchant and transportation vessels operating in Greek seas (ships which number in the thousands) would be compulsorily employed by the Navy’s General Staff, mostly for transportation and logistic purposes.

Submarine Fleets

The total number of (all types of) submarines possessed by the two countries is roughly equivalent. Greece owns nine submarines, and expects another three, while Turkey has 14.

The subs currently on delivery for Greece are of the newer, 214 type, which are manufactured by the German company HDW. The rest are of the 209/1100 and 209/1200 types. Turkey also uses the 209/1400 and 209/1200 types.

Due to Greece’s current economic woes, it is likely that the country will not procure additional submarines until 2015 at least. It is more likely that it will either buy used 209 models, or continue an upgrade program. Economically booming Turkey, on the other hand, has made plans for a massive procurement of up to six 214-type submarines, which will certainly affect the maritime balance of power in this sector.

The Greek Navy is oriented almost exclusively towards Turkey. The Turkish Navy, on the other hand, has to patrol the Black Sea and the East Mediterranean. Thus in practical terms, both countries tend to retain a balance of power, with the Greek Navy having the advantage of hundreds of submarine ‘hideouts’ within the multitude of natural underwater caves in many Greek Aegean islands. Greece was the first country worldwide that used a submarine in war, and that was in 1912. In WWII, Greek submarines fought across the Mediterranean, sinking a considerable number of Italian and German ships.

Naval Air Power

The Greek and Turkish navies also have their own tactical aircraft supporting their respective missions. Although Greece boasts a much larger navy, in terms of navy-owned planes, it lacks an advantage here due to the urgent need to replace its P-3B fleet. It is likely, according to all available information, that Greece will procure additional naval aircraft within the coming two years to attempt to redress the balance, or acquire used US Navy ones, probably of the S-3 Viking type.

In terms of naval helicopters, both countries use much of the same models and have a roughly equal balance of power, with the navy of Turkey owning six helicopters more than does Greece.

Helicopters in the navy play an important and varied role in tasks such as anti-submarine warfare, reconnaissance, military intelligence, seek-and-destroy missions against naval installations and small-mid-sized vessels, as well as Special Forces transportation.

Planes

Greece: P-3B: 6 planes

Turkey: CN-235: 6 planes; also 10 ATR ASW on order

Helicopters



Greece: S-70B, AB 212 ASW/EW, and SA Alouette III: 23 helicopters

Turkey: S-70B, AB 212 ASW/EW, AB 204, and Socata TB20: 29 helicopters

Main Battle Vessels

Greece uses 14 frigates and Turkey 17. Also, Turkey has 7 corvettes, while Greece has none. Lastly, Turkey has 27 fast attack boats, while Greece has 20, and also has 10 gunboats.

Frigates

Greece: MEKO 200, S-Kortenaer types: 14 plus 10 gunboats

Turkey: PERRY, MEKO 200 types: 17 plus 7 corvettes (D’Estienne D’Orves type)

Fast Attack Boats

Greece: Super Vita, Combatane III types: 20 plus 1 on order

Turkey: KILIC, DOGAN, KARTAL types: 27

Other Types of Vessels

Other types of vessels possessed by the two navies include patrol boats, coastal defense ships, coast guard vessels, landing craft and mine-hunting boats, hovercrafts, logistics and training boats, and so on.

Greece: 186 vessels, out of which six are coastal defense, 95 coast guard, eight patrol boats, three hovercrafts, five marine troop transportation vessels, 15 landing attack vessels, 10 mine-hunting vessels, three petrol fuel vessels and 41 others.

Turkey: 219 vessels- basically, in the same proportions as the Greek ones, with the exception of the hovercraft.

Coast Guard Air Forces

The coast guards of both countries play a vital role in not only military options, but also in humanitarian rescue operations such as the frequent interception of ships containing illegal immigrants in Greek waters, sent from Turkey, the Middle East or North Africa. They are typically on the ‘front lines’ due to the long and complicated coastlines separating the two countries, and thus see plenty of activity.

Greece: F-406, Cessna, AS 365 airplane types: 13 units; AS Super Puma helicopter type: 4 units

Turkey: CN-235 airplane type: 3 units; AB 412 helicopter type: 16 units

Coastal Defense Aircraft and Missile Systems

Coastal defense is of key concern to both countries, as large populated areas as well as vital military defenses are located virtually opposite one another up and down the shared Aegean frontier.

At times, the obsession with gaining intelligence on the whereabouts and identities of air defense systems has had spectacular and deadly results- as in the fatal collision between aircraft near Karpathos in the summer of 2006. As Balkanalysis.com noted in 2007, this collision occurred after a Turkish aircraft deep in Greek airspace clipped a Greek plane, killing its pilot. The Turkish intention seems to have been to gain intelligence on the placement of Russian-made mobile anti-aircraft missile systems in the Lassithi prefecture of eastern Crete.

Greece: MM40 Exocet missile systems: (an estimated 40 missiles), plus Crotale NG anti-aircraft: two systems along with 180 anti-aircraft artillery units

Turkey: 11 Stinger missile systems

The main missile systems used by Greek vessels are Exocet, Harpoon, RAM and Penguin missiles. The Greek Navy’s imminent procurement programme involves the acquisition of French Scalp NAVAL missiles, which have a range up to 800 km. To illustrate the significance of this upgrade, we should consider that currently the longest-range missile in the Greek arsenal is 180 km. The Turkish Navy, for its part, mostly uses Harpoon missiles.

Naval Special Forces

Both countries have special SEALs that are specialized in naval and coastal warfare. These units comprise only a few hundred men, each of whom is equipped with state-of-the-art armaments and transportation means. In case of any conflict, these elite forces would be activated first, undertaking missions of naval sabotage, attacks against command-and-control installations and targeted assassinations of officers.

It has also to be noted that both countries operate (and especially Greece) with an extensive maritime patrol observation-monitoring and targeting network of stations and bases that, through the use of technological means and human resources, constantly check the movements of the maritime adversary. It is assumed that both countries also operate spy vessels that travel as commercial or fishing boats, and that are used for telecommunications surveillance.

Appendix: Cyprus

Since the 1974 invasion of Cyprus and division of the island, Turkey has supported the development of offensive and defensive installations on the northern third of the island, the non-recognized ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.’

However, both countries have historically had direct involvement and devised long-term contingency plans for any possible future showdown that would require their participation. Greece and Turkey, should they go to war because of Cyprus, would most probably provide naval support, in addition to other military support needed.

The Republic of Cyprus has the definitive advantage, possessing a fleet of 15 patrol boats and three Exocet systems with 24 missiles. The Turkish-controlled Northern Cyprus possesses one patrol boat.

In a hypothetical Cypriot Sea battle, the submarine fleets of Greece and Turkey would play an important role, with each one trying to disrupt the troop transportation lines of the other from the mainland to the Island. Moreover, the air forces of both countries would play a similar role in preventing the operations of the navies.

Finally, we should note that the current developments in Syria – where Turkish support for the rebellion has been noted, angering the Assad regime – and the breakdown of Turkish-Israeli relations has prompted new strategic questions for Turkish naval planners and strained the Turkish Navy’s capacities in the Eastern Mediterranean, which may be an emerging front for poten

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

Canada, Halifax Shipyard project may shrink

Ottawa’s budgetary crunch could mean a scaled-back Halifax shipbuilding project, defence analysts say.

The federal government’s austerity measures, which are forcing the Department of National Defence to shed $2-billion from its budget, could translate into fewer dollars for the federal shipbuilding strategy.

Defence experts say that could take some wind out of the sails of Halifax’s Irving Shipbuilding yard. Last fall it won the combatant portion of the navy’s 30-year shipbuilding program, once valued at $25 billion.

“Something has to give,” said defence expert Dan Middlemiss, a former Dalhousie University professor. “There’s less money. We’re going to see a delay or fewer of them (warships).”

If so, this wouldn’t be the first time that Ottawa has scaled back its shipbuilding plans. The federal government originally hoped to build 18 frigates, plus more for export, as part of the Canadian Patrol Frigate program during the early 1990s.

In the end only 12 were ever contracted for.

The umbrella agreement with Ottawa calls for the Halifax yard to build 21 combat vessels.

But Steven Staples, a defence expert and president of the Rideau Institute, an Ottawa think-tank, said the hoopla leading up to the Irving selection may have led to some misunderstandings about the nature of the federal government’s commitment.

“No contracts have been awarded,” Staples said. “The government just said, ‘In future we will negotiate with you, Mr. Irving, and with Seaspan (the Vancouver yard which won the non-combat portion of the program).’ ”

“The tough negotiations for the contracts are underway now.”

An Irving Shipbuilding spokeswoman said Monday that the company continues to “work with the federal government on the next steps in the process.”

Mary Keith said via email that the umbrella agreement was the first step for the yard. “Our efforts are now fully focused on the timely completion of the Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships contracts — the ancillary agreement, the design contract and a third contract to build the ships.

Keith added: “The importance of expediency in moving NSPS (National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy) contracts forward as efficiently as possible, as well as looking for ways to sustain a skilled and ready workforce, cannot be undervalued.”

The negotiations, however, take place amid sweeping federal government cutbacks. Adding to the pressure, said analysts, is that the Harper government is still feeling the political fallout from the huge cost overruns on the F-35 fighter jets that the government has proposed buying to replace the aging fleet of F-18s.

Even the cost of the ships is a moving target, says Jim Carruthers, an ex-captain in the Canadian navy and president of the Ottawa branch of the Naval Association of Canada.

“Building ships that will be in service for something like 50 years is one of the most complex things that humans do,” he said in an interview.

“No one has it figured out.”

Monday, 11 June 2012

Top-secret embarrassment: Stealth ship laptop missing in Taiwan

A locally designed Kuang Hua VI class boat from the Taiwanese navy

A top-secret computer from a state-of-art stealth warship has vanished, the Taiwanese military revealed on Monday. There are fears the laptop and its classified content is now in the hands of the Chinese.

­The computer was installed on board a Kuang Hua No. 6 class guided missile vessel. It belonged to a private contractor and was used for testing confidential communication equipment and procedures.

Last month it disappeared, while the missile ship was stationed at the southern port of Tsoying, Taiwan's largest naval base. An internal investigation failed to determine how it happened.

“We admit that the navy exhibited some flaws in the control of personnel at the base," a naval spokesman told AFP.

The case has now been handed over to the military prosecutors.

Taiwan deployed a squadron on 10 Kuang Hua No. 6 ships in 2010, which was deemed a major improvement to the country’s naval capabilities. They are each armed with four locally developed Hsiungfeng II ship-to-ship missiles, with a range of 150 kilometres. They are also designed to be stealthy and reduce the risk of being detected.

The missing computer may have been stolen by Chinese spies interested in modern military technologies, experts believe.

"If China obtained the laptop, it would get the navy's highly sensitive communications code as well as related missile data," said Erich Shih, an editor at Taipei-based Defence International magazine.

China and Taiwan have been separate since the end of a civil war in 1949. Beijing still considers the island part of its territory waiting for reunification. Relations between the two have been improving thanks to increased trade. The thaw was championed by Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou, who came to power in 2008.

Friday, 8 June 2012

German Navy christens third Berlin-class ship

German Navy's third Type 702 Berlin-class vessel, BONNThe German Navy's third Type 702 Berlin-class combat support ship (CSS) has been formally christened Bonn (1413) at Emder Werft und Dockbetriebe.

Managed by the federal office of defence technology and procurement (BWB), the batch of the CSS is being built by a consortium of four dockyards in Fr. Lürssen Werft, Flensburger Schiffbau Gesellschaft, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems and Peene-Werft.

The third CSS features improved functional areas as compared to 1411 and 1412 ships and has been designed to support current operational constraints mainly in environmental protection safety.

As a central and flexible support unit, the third ship will help meet the German Navy's worldwide operational needs and also provide protection for the soldiers.

The CSS Bonn design has reduced operation and maintenance costs, creating a financial leeway for the German Navy in future.

Peene-Werft constructed the CSS Bonn hull in Wolgast, while Flensburger Schiffbau Gesellschaft designed its deckhouse in Flensburg.

Emder Werft und Dockbetriebe, subsidiary of ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, had outfitted the CSS Bonn since May 2011 and the ship is scheduled for commissioning by the end of September 2012.
"The third ship will help meet the German Navy's worldwide operational needs and also provide protection for the soldiers."

The German Navy currently operates two Berlin-class CSS ships CSS Berlin (1411) and CSS Frankfurt Am Main (1412), which were commissioned in 2001 and 2002 respectively.

Powered by two diesel engines, the Berlin-class frigates feature in-flight refuelling-capabilities (HIFR) and replenishment-at-sea (RAS) systems in accordance with Nato regulations.

The 173.70m-long Berlin-class vessels can carry two helicopters and are equipped with two 24t cranes and an array of 14 medium to small calibre self-defence weapons.

Capable of carrying a crew of 237, the second batch of Berlin-class vessels have a displacement capacity of 20,000t, a beam of 24m and cruising speed of 20k with 45 days of endurance period.

Monday, 4 June 2012

(Something a Little Different) - The Golden Shipwreck. Steam Clipper Royal Charter comes to grief

The Royal Charter was a 2,719 ton steam clipper, fitted with a 200 horse power auxiliary engine. George Cramm laid down the Royal Charter, ordered by Charles Moore and Company of Liverpool, launching her on the River Dee in 1855. Gibbs Bright and Company bought her in an unfinished state, taking over the hull of this iron sailing ship after her original builder failed, and went bankrupt. William Patterson now completed the vessel to the new owner's specifications, the ship destined for the Australian run. Made from steel with clipper lines, the engine was added to avoid the ship becoming becalmed in the Doldrums, and designed to carry up to 600 passengers, but with a limited cargo capacity. Royal Charter was the fastest ship plying the route between Liverpool and Australia, usually making the trip in under 60 days.

The Royal Charter Steam Clipper

The 26th. of August in 1859 found the ship clearing Hobson's Bay, Victoria, Australia, and setting a course for Liverpool via Cape Horn. Captain Taylor in command, with 400 passengers, and carrying a precious cargo of gold from the newly found goldfields of the Colony, with a value of half a million Pounds Sterling, anticipated a fast run home to Liverpool.

Close to Cape Horn an iceberg was narrowly avoided, and by the 24th. of October, the ship was anchored some 20 miles off the port of Cork in Ireland. Course was set for Liverpool, and with night fast falling, the wind was freshening, to quickly develop into a full gale, which fell with great fury upon the ship.

Off the Skerries, Captain Taylor called for a Pilot, to no avail, again he asked for a Pilot off Point Lynas, but no pilot boat was forthcoming, it was far too rough for any small boat to venture out into the gale force winds and wild seas.

By 2300 ( 11 PM ) the storm threatened the safety of Royal Charter, the port anchor was let go, and 100 fathoms of cable paid out, this was quickly followed by letting go the starboard anchor with 70 fathoms of cable, for some time the two anchors steadied the vessel. But at 0130 ( 1.30 AM ) the port cable suddenly parted, to be quickly followed by the starboard cable also parting.

The vessel soon grounded, with the coming of dawn about 0530 ( 5.30 AM ) the wreck was seen on shore by Thomas Hughes and Mesech Williams who were absolutely helpless to do anything but watch the ship being pounded to pieces.

    "Every moment the horrified spectators expected to see the waves burying in their depths the wrecking vessel, and more intense became their terror and excitement, when they beheld a man let himself down from the deck by a rope in the midst of the breakers."

    "This was the heroic Joseph Rogers ( a Maltese able seaman ) who had volunteered to swim with a hawser to shore, and who, though three times driven back by the hissing floods, nobly perservered, and succeeded in making fast the rope to the rock, now the only means that remained of landing those onboard the Royal Charter."

Through the efforts of Rogers and men from Moelfre forming a human chain in the raging seas, 18 of 376 passengers, 5 of 11 riggers working their passage home, 18 of more than 100 crew, but no officers, were saved.
Jack Russell, survivor of the wreck of the Royal Charter


These 28 local men who valiantly went to the rescue at great danger to themselves are not recorded on any monument, but I list them here:

    Thomas Roberts
    Owen Roberts
    Owen Roberts jr
    David Williams
    Mesech Williams
    Robert Lewis
    Thomas Hughes
    John Hughes
    William Owen
    Richard Hughes
    Evan Williams
    John Perry
    John Owens
    Thomas Parry
    John Lewis
    Joseph Williams
    Thomas Owen
    William Williams
    Richard Mathew
    Isreal Mathew
    William Pritchard
    Owen Hughes
    Richard Evans
    David Owen
    John Lewis jr
    William Owen
    Lewis Francis
    John Francis

St Gallgos, the village church became a makeshift morgue as the bodies of many of the victims were brought ashore from the sea. The Rector of Llaneugred and Llanallgo, the Reverend Stephen Roose Hughes and his brother, the Reverend Hugh Robert Hughes, buried many of the victims, the former going to meticulous lengths to record everything he could about each body, including the contents of their pockets, he also wrote some 1,075 letters to answer queries of the relatives of the victims.
Royal Charter Monument

The subsequent strain of it all brought an early death to Stephen Roose Hughes, he now lies buried amongst those who bodies were brought ashore from the wrecked Royal Charter, his gravestone bearing this inscription:

    "His noble and disinterested exertions on the memorable occasion of the terrible wreck of the Royal Charter are well known throughout the world."

In the graveyard is an obelisk built through public subscription to recall the tragedy and those who died.

There were reports just after this shipwreck of imposing new houses springing up around Moelfre, reportedly financed from Golden Loot, washed ashore from Royal Charter's cargo.

Alexander McKee gives a graphic account of this disaster in his book The Golden Wreck. The Tragedy of the Royal Charter.

No less a personage than Charles Dickens covered this event in a contemporary account recorded in his Uncommercial Traveller which is reprinted in Shipwreck. Charles Dickens and the Royal Charter edited by Robert Williams.
  
Once again the Cruel Sea had claimed another fine ship, bringing her to grief at Molfre on the Isle of Anglesea, Wales.
Royal Charter Monument.