Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

arijitkm · Post by **arijitkm** » 20 Sep 2014 23:13

Anti-submarine choppers to be made in India soon Financial Express

The Indian Navy’s wait for the much-needed anti-submarine warfare helicopters to operate from its warships may just get longer. The Narendra Modi government, determined to push domestic manufacturing of defence equipment, is likely to scrap a plan to acquire a squadron of naval multi-role helicopters (NMRH) from global vendors and issue fresh requests for proposals, stipulating that these machines must be made in India and the main vendor should be Indian.

The idea is to shift these purchases to a category where India buys the technology from overseas and the manufacturing of the equipment/machine is done here. Under this “Buy and Make in India” policy of the defence ministry, 80% of the cost of development and prototyping will be borne by the government, while the remainder is to be financed by the developing agency (DA).

The scrapping of the plan to procure 16 NMRH from global vendors, which was meant to be the first phase of a contract to acquire a fleet of 91 such helicopters at a cost of $3 billion, would likely be announced after the next meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) at the end of this month, official sources told FE.

The NMRH fleet will be equipped with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities and customised for amphibious assaults and commando operations. The Modi government’s decision is expected to generate business worth over Rs. 20,0000 crore for the local industry, sources said.
......

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Sep 2014 00:00

Continuation of the report.

Though the navy is on track to induct four to five warships every year over the next decade, it is fast running out of helicopters meant to detect and kill enemy submarines. It just has 11 Kamov-28 and 17 Sea King ASW helicopters to defend its existing fleet of over 130 warships. While the Sea Kings are over 20 years old, the Kamov-28s are long overdue for a mid-life upgrade.

The dear Lord help the IN.New warships have been inducted without missiles,helicopters,etc.One lauds the push for domestic manufacture,but what about battleworthiness across the board for the 3 services? Aircraft,helicopters are plagued with obsolescence problems,subs are worthy of being pensioned off,there must be some foreign buy to maintain defence preparedness and prevent capabilities from deteriorating.

Secondly,do we actually have the capabilities to absorb the enormous amount of high tech that is being inducted? There is a huge manpower shortage with the DRDO,DPSUs which are already running very late with their existing programmes such as the LCA,Scorpene,etc. When we haven't even flown the LUH we have ambitions of manufacturing even under licence, sophisticated multi-role helos.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 21 Sep 2014 12:24

Austin wrote:“Delay is the price for high-tech systems”, says Vice Admiral Satish Soni, who heads Eastern Naval Command

"We will fight with what we have"

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 21 Sep 2014 21:49

GSAT-7 bolsters Indian Navy's Network Centric Warfare (NCW) capability

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 21 Sep 2014 22:18

All Naval ships will soon have stealth features

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 21 Sep 2014 23:19

Which IN ships are next up for retirement?

In the last 10 years all ships acquired uptill the '70s have been retired (aside from the Viraat). Foxtrots, Niligiris, SDBs, auxilliarys and all.

Pondicherry minesweepers and some of the amphibs are probably due for retirement.

Rajputs seem to be in fine shape judging by the continuous upgrades and long voyages around the globe!

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Sep 2014 23:56

^ May be moddified Leander class(Godavari) they got commissioned before the R class .

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Sep 2014 04:13

Even these have had some upgrades.Their principal SSMs need to be changed.Either Klub or BMos if possible.I don't know how long the Styx later models (P-27s) life span is ,but they've been in service for decades.We probably have a large inventory of the same and are using them until their lifespan expires.

Now the challenge the IN has to face from China and Pak,the latter which according to media reports today,are developing small tactical nuke warheads for cruise missiles for their subs and surface ships,giving them a second-strile capability.Here is a USN report on the growth of the Russian and Chinese sub capabilities. The IN/MOD must give the highest priority to fast tracking our strat. N-sub deterrent,building and acquiring more nuclear attack subs like Akulas/ATV variants,plus increasing asap the conventional sub force.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014 ... 741&rank=1

US Navy Issues Warnings on Russia, China’s Submarine Fleets
Share on facebook6.7K Share on twitter Share on google_plusone_share Share on more
61 comments
US Navy Issues Warnings on Russia, China’s Submarine Fleets
Nerpa, an Akula II-class attack submarine. (Photo by RIA Novosti)
Military.com Sep 20, 2014 | by Kris Osborn

The Navy’s top Atlantic Submarine Force commander said Thursday that Russia and China’s ballistic missile submarine development will impact how the U.S deploys its fleet.

Navy Vice Adm. Michael Connor said global threats today are far more numerous and dispersed compared to the Cold War when the U.S. focused solely on Russia. Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has treated Russia more like a partner.

However, those goodwill feelings have changed since Russia has shown aggression in its recent conflict with Ukraine and instituted some tactics the U.S. hasn’t seen since the Cold War. Considering Russia’s significant nuclear arsenal, it has drawn the attention of the Navy’s nuclear submarine leaders.

“The Soviet Union devolved into Russia but they kept their nuclear capabilities. They are now re-growing those capabilities and others. As they re-grow, we find that modern Russia appears to have some aspirations both territory-wise and influence-wise that are reminiscent of the way they behaved when we had the Soviet Union,” Connor said.

Last week, Russia broadcast its intent to upgrade its submarine fleet when Russian officials released photos of two Akula II-class nuclear submarines being ferried to a shipyard to receive modernization upgrades.

Along with Russia, the U.S. Navy has taken a closer look at China’s submarine fleet warning that its advancement means the Chinese have a global strike capability, Connor said.

“The world has become multi-polar and we have competition for global influence and power from a rising China -- which is also very much on our mind. The Chinese have had ballistic missile submarines in some form for a while. Their pace has accelerated and they have several nuclear ballistic missile submarines and are continuing to build more,” Connor said.

In February, the Office of Naval Intelligence issued an assessment on the Chinese navy as part of testimony to the US-China Economic and Security Review. ONI leaders found that China’s navy has evolved from a littoral force to one that is capable of meeting a wide range of missions to include being "increasingly capable of striking targets hundreds of miles from the Chinese mainland."

In particular, ONI raised concerns about China’s fast-growing submarine force, to include the Jin-class ballistic nuclear submarines, which will likely commence deterrent patrols in 2014, according to the report. The expected operational deployment of the Jin SSBN "would mark China’s first credible at-sea-second-strike nuclear capability," the report states.

The submarine would fire the JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missile, which has a range of 4,000 nautical miles and would "enable the Jin to strike Hawaii, Alaska and possibly western portions of CONUS [continental United States] from East Asian waters," ONI assessed.

The report says the Chinese currently have five nuclear attack submarines, four nuclear ballistic missile submarines and 53 diesel attack submarines.

Overall, China's fleet of submarines has quickly increased in offensive weapons technology over the last 10 years. A decade ago, only a few Chinese submarines could fire modern anti-ship cruise missiles. Now, more than half of the conventional attack submarines are configured to fire anti-ship cruise missiles, or ASCMs, the report states.

"The type-095 guided missile attack submarine, which China will likely construct over the next decade, may be equipped with a land-attack capability," the assessment explains. This could enable Chinese submarines with an enhanced ability to strike U.S. bases throughout the region, the report adds.

Overall, Russia and China are firmly committed to have an undersea nuclear deterrent capability with a strong naval component, Connor added.

“We want to resolve minor conflict before they become major conflicts,” he explained.

Connor made his remarks about Russian and China while commemorating the 4,000th strategic deterrence ballistic missile submarine patrol, explaining that undersea nuclear deterrence had its origins in the 1960s. Back then, the U.S needed 41 submarines.

The U.S. Navy’s fleet has since shrunk to 14 nuclear armed submarines based in Bangor, Washington, or Kings Bay, Georgia. The U.S. Navy plans to begin construction of a new-generation of Ohio-class, nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarines by 2021 called the Ohio Replacement program, Connor added.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Sep 2014 02:31

Oz's plan to acquire Japanese Soryu subs has run into controversy,heavily criticised by its former naval officers.One key point alleged is the shorter lifespan of the Japanese subs.Some have suggested that the In acquire the same for the P-75I tender.Read on.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nation ... 8f51990d7f
Former high-ranking naval officers flay efforts to buy new submarines from Japan and not locally

Samantha MaidenNational Political Editor
Sunday Mail (SA)
September 20, 2014

How buying Japan-built submarines will impact us
Massive budget blowout in warships program

AUSTRALIA’s “submarine greybeards’’ have torpedoed a plan to build the nation’s stealth submarine fleet in Japan, warning Defence Minister David Johnston that “a submarine is not a car’’.

Retired Rear Admiral Peter Briggs and retired Commodore Terence Roach have sounded the alarm in a strongly worded letter obtained by The Sunday Mail.

It warns the “time delays, high cost and risk’’ associated with outsourcing the sensitive project to Japan, a move that could also anger China.

Australia has made no formal announcement that the next generation of submarines will be built in Japan but the Defence Minister has hailed the Japanese submarines as on “the cutting edge’’ of technology worldwide.

Speculation has surrounded Australia buying up to 12 Japanese Soryu submarines, the world’s biggest non-nuclear submarines.

At around $500 million each, they would be cheaper than Aussie built subs. But the deal would risk thousands of jobs in South Australia.
A Japanese Soryu class submarine.

The retired senior naval commanders warn that “however desirable closer Defence ties with Japan may be, little consideration seems to have been given to the suitability of Japanese designed submarines to meet the Australian requirements.’’

“Submarines are not cars — you cannot simply switch to another like
disposing of a Holden to buy a Mitsubishi,’’ the letter states.

“They are designed for a specific purpose and unfortunately big compromises would have to be accepted if Australia is to buy Japanese without serious design modifications, incurring
further time delays, high cost and risk.

Govt backtracks on submarine promise
http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/exte ... z9c5xuj3mc

“The prospects for difficulties arising from cultural differences with Japan are all too apparent and very real. To expect to access all relevant technologies during the course of an

overseas build of such a complex vessel as a submarine for the initial

collaboration with a country, which has no experience in such matters, is

extraordinarily ambitious and inherently risky.

“The practicalities of establishing a transparent dialogue with Japan, a country

that has no established protocols with Australia for the exchange of classified,

sensitive technical data and which must develop regimes to regulate this

dialogue seem to have been ignored. It is certain that this will be a very

protracted process.’’

In response a spokesman for Senator Johnston said he would not be drawn into a discussion of the merits of Japan’s submarines.

“We don’t discuss the military capability of Australia or other nations,’’ he said.

A senior government source confirmed the subs were regarded as among the best currently available but that no final decision had been made on strategic partners with Sweden, France and German partners sill in the mix.

“We don’t make decisions that are not in the national interest,’’ he said.

A major concern, however, is the long ranges Australian submarines need to travel and the unique requirements involved.

“It is apparent therefore that SORYU will need to be modified to meet the

Australian requirements — long ocean transits and patrols. This would carry

considerable cost and risk,’’ the letter states.

“The Japanese submarines are reportedly retired at a much earlier age (about

16 or so years) than normally expected in the Western world, which will

require Australia to invest heavily in special maintenance and upgrade

programs unless we do the same.’’

Originally published as Experts: Replacing subs is not like cars

In the IN context,we have far superior nuclear sub capability in the form of both local production (ATVs) and foreign acquisition (Akulas). There was another report indicating that Russia has just sent in two Akulas for upgrades to the shipyard.Nuclear subs give the best capability for long range (virtually infinite due to N-propulsion),endurance (90-100 days) and speed in reaching the operational area in a crisis.
I don't think that "angering China" though is a serious factor.Look at China's muted silence on Russia supplying 6 Kilos at record speed and very affordable prices to Vietnam! It dare not protest,itself having received much Russian military largesse after the demise of the USSR.

The MOD/IN should immediately shore up our deleted sub capability with new leases/buys of Russian subs which we already operate as an interim solution,before we can build at speed our own SSGNs in a second line in parallel with that of the Arihant SSBN class.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Sep 2014 10:03

Defence Ministry flags irregularities in purchase of mine-sweepers

Warship deal runs aground

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 23 Sep 2014 11:07

MoD still hasn't got its head out of its arse I see. The more things change the more they remain the same.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Sep 2014 13:40

Well, you were the first to call it, about the lack of a full time Def Min.
But some decisions seem to be faster.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 23 Sep 2014 14:23

Cancelling deals due to middlemen is an albatross around the neck of the MoD foisted upon it by the Saint. Maybe time to legitimize middlemen? What should India care if middlemen are there or not as long as bribes aren't paid to influence what to buy and how much?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Sep 2014 15:08

Well, if you legitimize middlemen, lifafagiri will go official and 1000x. Expect the cesspool to move from a few furtive groups to open brazen wheeling dealing on an industrial scale.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 23 Sep 2014 15:09

^^ As per the treaty ending WW2, for which India too was a signatory under the British Commonwealth, Japan is not allowed to have any military. Later during the cold war, they were allowed to have Self Defence Forces. However number of platforms were restricted by an unstated understanding with the US.

To keep their manufacturing base running, and to ensure they manufactured the latest, the Japanese had to build more ships & submarines than they could operate, hence the early retirement of oldest ships that still had plenty of service life & fight in them.

Japanese ships and submarines are the best in the world today. Manufacturing quality is better than US & European shipyards.

The Australian article looks like cheap lobbying.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Sep 2014 16:28

The Japanese problem is that their production runs are very low and also, they (logically) want everything built at home, even while trying to keep their relationship with the US going. So they end up remaking the US platforms locally with localization eg F16--->F2 and at much greater price per unit than original. If you are a third party guy trying to purchase these, then it will be expensive and definitely not cheap. Our Arjun MK2 suffers from much the same problem. Features expected are of Leopard 2A6/M1A2 class but production is a fraction of the former, so per unit price will be high. Similarly, Soryus will definitely cost a bomb while they may be of very high quality as you point out. Another issue is they will also have US made equipment and tech even in mostly local platforms, sonar for instance is supposedly American derived. I think where we can truly leverage things is to have JVs with them for completely Japan-India platforms, or basic technology development. The Saint continued the idiotic policy of blacklisting South Africa otherwise we could have had really good deals with Kentron, its a world class firm and the Pakis are leveraging tech which could have been ours.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Sep 2014 17:02

Although Japanese try to build a F-16 or Soryus but they still use a lot of US based component in their Ships, Subs and Aircraft so in the end what ever they do they are still dependent on the US and likely if they have to export some system they would need export rights from US .....for countries that have security arrangement with the US like Japanese and Australia its fine.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Sep 2014 17:12

China wants single-hulled subs from this report.It may explain why it is v.keen to acquire Russian Amur/Ladas,which have been offered first to India.In fact around the millenium,there were hints that we had approved the buy of Ladas.It appears to have been shot down by Quisling Singh and his regime when they took over after the NDA-1 govt.For the IN,which has both blue water and littoral waters ops,a mix of double-hulled and single-hulled subs would be ideal.The Amurs are said to be even quieter and cheaper than the Kilos.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0922000074

China needs single-hulled submarines: Chinese expert
Staff Reporter
2014-09-22
The PLA Navy type 094 submarine is an example of a double-hulled submarine. (Internet Photo)

The single-hull submarine is much more suitable for the combat environment China faces today than the double-hull submarines currently used by the PLA Navy, said Ma Ling, an expert in submarine development, in an interview with Hangzhou-based Qianjiang Evening News.

The double-hull submarine's numerous ballast chambers make it harder to sink than its single-hulled cousin. In addition, the double-hull can endure more torpedo strikes, according to Ma. China has moved in this direction when making purchases or constructing to ensure the survival of its submarine fleet. The double-hull however, may not end up giving PLA Navy any measurable advantage when operating in the Far East.

As Ma said, the Yellow and East China Seas are both too shallow for larger double-hull submarines to hide from enemy attack. Also, the ballast chambers leave no space to install noise reduction equipment, making them far easier to detect. They are only suitable for operation in some parts of the First Island Chain, extending from Alaska to the Philippines.

*(and the Indo-China Sea which isnwhy Vietnam is buying Kilos and is being trained by the IN)

The PLA Navy should consider introducing or building more single-hull variants, said Ma. It is a reform that China must take because double-hull submarines can no longer stand up to anti-submarine warfare launched by the US Navy and Japan Maritime Self Defense Force together with aircraft, warships, submarines and sonar networks. Ma said the reform will be difficult for the PLA Navy, but cannot be avoided.

PS:Good video of Israel's latest Dolfin+ nuke missile AIP sub here.Israel says that it will operate its subs off any enemy's coast.The sub has two sets of TTs,533 and 650mm.

Meet Israel’s Newest, Most Expensive Weapon: The INS Tanin Submarine (VIDEO)

September 22, 2014
Author:
avatar Dave Bender
Ram Rothberg
INS Tanin. Photo: Ariel Schnabel

In a commemoration aboard Israel’s 4th and newest submarine, the INS Tanin (“crocodile,” or “alligator”), the IDF on Sunday held a wreath-laying ceremony at the site where 69 soldiers of INS Dakar went down with the ship, in the Mediterranean Sea some 270 miles off the Israeli coast in 1968, the Israeli army said.

“We will guard, protect, and act in any enemy coast, and fight bravely for the navy and the state of Israel,” Adm. Ram Rothberg, said at the event, The Jerusalem Post noted.

Referring to the prowess of the new Dolphin-class craft, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz said that, “Without a doubt, this power, operationally and strategically, is very important for Israel, the IDF and the navy.”

The INS Tanin is the most expensive weapon currently in IDF service, at a cost of over $513 million dollars, and is considered one of the most sophisticated submarines in the world.

“More than four decades passed since INS Dakar’s last voyage… Although the threats have changed, and today you have the most modern equipment, the most advanced technologies, and the most quality means, the mission remains the same mission that the INS Dakar personnel were sent on, and the responsibility is the same. To protect the Israeli coast, sea waters, and working with all of the IDF’s branches to achieve the relevant goals,” Gantz said.
The INS Tanin leaving German dockyards. Photo: IDF
INS Dakar survivors aboard the INS Tanin. Photo: Ariel Schnabel

In addition to the IDF’s top brass, three survivors of the Dakar were aboard: Abraham Szabo, Israel Rosen and Abraham Carmel.

The three, who were supposed to have boarded the submarine, at the last minute received orders to remain dockside and wait a few days before another ship was scheduled to arrive in Israel, according to Israel’s NRG News.

According to the Defense Industry Daily, the diesel-electric attack submarine will be outfitted with its Israeli systems after arrival at a specially-made, secretive dock in Haifa.

The sub is reportedly designed for a crew of 35 and can support 10 passengers. It is said to have a maximum speed of 20 knots, and a maximum range of 2,700 miles (4,500 km).

The craft can fire torpedoes and missiles, perform underwater surveillance, and launch combat swimmers out of wet and dry compartments.
According to Janes, the Dolphin-class subs are reportedly nuclear-armed, possibly with Israel’s Popeye Tubo cruise missile.

The official festive welcoming ceremony is set for Tuesday in Haifa.
The next craft in the fleet, the INS Rahav is scheduled to arrive in Israel during 2015, with a sixth projected to arrive in 2019.

Watch the ceremony:
Take an inside look at the most formidable, and expensive weapon, in Israel’s arsenal:

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Sep 2014 17:24

LOL, why should India buy Amurs or Ladas when it can just extend the Scorpene line and get better subs which are in line with its logistics?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Sep 2014 17:34

Cost factor.The Scorpenes which we are building,non-AIP subs that too are hideously expensive,almost $600M a sub.The Scorpene's missiles are inferior subsonic SM-Exocets too,much inferior to the Klub missiles that the IN operates on its Kilos which have anti-ship,land attack and anti-sub variants,with a Mach 3+ terminal homing warhead for the anti-ship version.These missiles cannot be fitted to our Scorpenes.Moreover,there was a report last year which quoted IN submariners who said that by the time the Scorpenes were inducted into IN service ,suffering a 5 yr. delay,their design would be obsolete,overtaken by newer coventional AIP subs like the German Dolfins for Israel.Some may recollect my take a few years ago that we should upgrade and acquire new German U-Boats ,another 4 to partner the 4 U-209/1500s that we possess.Their upgrade is now taking place.The Greek subs were available at that time,which Greece could not pay for.We missed the (U)-boat!

Moreover,the bulk of the IN's sub fleet are of Russian origin and operating another follow on design to the Kilo which has a BMos version too,comes in at around just $300+M.One can acquire two Amurs for the price of just one non-AIP Scorpene.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Sep 2014 18:35

1. Scorpenes will get AIP, check your data. Indian or French, but they are slated to get it.
2. Inferior missiles are a matter of interpretation. Trade off in terms of overall better platforms and better sensor suite than on the Russian LADA/Amurs. Both can get the job done.
3.Good that we didn't follow your plan as the Dolphins went into trouble and the Greek Govt and Germany were in an acrimonious debate about who pays for it.
4.Follow on design would be more obsolete than the Scorpenes and the former will come with new lines of logistics making your simple calculations completely wrong.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 23 Sep 2014 19:49

Hello Philip, I'm just curious and intend no offense, but wanted to understand your fascination towards all things Russian. Unless you're a denizen of Russia and its a matter of National Pride. Again, no offense intended, and everyone has the right to keep & share their own views.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 23 Sep 2014 20:11

While they use US technology primarily to keep US happy, their indigenous technology is the most advanced in the world, and they make enhancements.

The F2 has more wing area than F-16, leading to better maneuverability for an already agile design.
Its the first production aircraft to use composites extensively.
The F2 was the world's first fighter with AESA radar. Way before F-22. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J/APG-1

Their ASM-3 supersonic missile is best in class http://all-about-military.blogspot.in/2 ... -ship.html

While it may seem to have lower range than Brahmos at 200 km, in reality, it flies at Mach 3 & higher throughout. Brahmos achieves 300 km range by flying high at Mach 1.2 during cruise phase and accelerating to Mach 3 in terminal homing phase. Range of BrahMos at Mach 3 throughout is only 120 km.

ASM-3 has a dual IIR & Radar seeker. It uses solid propellant and is light enough for two of them to be carried on a single engine mediumweight fighter like F2 while we've huffed & puffed to fit a single Brahmos to a twin engine heavyweight fighter like Su-30.

Definitely a lot for us to partner & learn & do together.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 23 Sep 2014 22:28

120 km for brahmos was in Lo-Lo mode. But Brahmos-M is needed fast.

kuldipchager · Post by **kuldipchager** » 23 Sep 2014 22:56

Karan M

Post subject: Re: Indian Naval Discussion

PostPosted: 23 Sep 2014 18:35

Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58
Posts: 5287

1. Scorpenes will get AIP, check your data. Indian or French, but they are slated to get it

Some time back, there was a news that Russia was assisting india in devolving of AIP the one it can make hydrogen from sea water while under water as it required for oxygen. I am sure it must be complete now and ready to install. But I don't think it will be install in French sub.

John · Post by **John** » 24 Sep 2014 05:48

tsarkar wrote:Their ASM-3 supersonic missile is best in class http://all-about-military.blogspot.in/2 ... -ship.html

XASM-3 is still work in progress i don't think this missile will be inducted any time before 2020, as for its performance the engine is far more efficient considering its newer missile same with Meteor. Also we don't know much terminal manuvering XASM-3 performs (Brahmos uses good portion of its fuel in terminal phase) or its warhead/seeker size so without that information comparing it to Brahmos is a moot point.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 24 Sep 2014 13:17

^^^also this 300 km range for Brahmos is just a Mukotaa to hide from MTCR sanctions which were Desh centric. Actaul range could be closer to 500KM as stated by a Russian Journal recently.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Sep 2014 23:37

tsarkar wrote:While they use US technology primarily to keep US happy, their indigenous technology is the most advanced in the world, and they make enhancements.

The F2 has more wing area than F-16, leading to better maneuverability for an already agile design.

Debatable. The JASDF regards the F2 as its strike fighter and the F15 is the primary air superiority type.

Its the first production aircraft to use composites extensively.
The F2 was the world's first fighter with AESA radar. Way before F-22. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J/APG-1

The AESA was actually underwhelming. Revealed figures about its performance are pretty mediocre to say the least, and the conventional APG-68 variants outperform it handily. It was more of a TD than anything though it did go into production on the F2. If you want to see their ambitious AESA plans, their GBR for BMD surveillance is one. They have another for their future fighter as well.

Their ASM-3 supersonic missile is best in class http://all-about-military.blogspot.in/2 ... -ship.html

While it may seem to have lower range than Brahmos at 200 km, in reality, it flies at Mach 3 & higher throughout. Brahmos achieves 300 km range by flying high at Mach 1.2 during cruise phase and accelerating to Mach 3 in terminal homing phase. Range of BrahMos at Mach 3 throughout is only 120 km.

ASM-3 has a dual IIR & Radar seeker. It uses solid propellant and is light enough for two of them to be carried on a single engine mediumweight fighter like F2 while we've huffed & puffed to fit a single Brahmos to a twin engine heavyweight fighter like Su-30.

Well Brahmos is the "last gap" of erstwhile SU missile tech. Its propulsion especially. Brahmos-mini is more of an example of what current tweaking can achieve.

Definitely a lot for us to partner & learn & do together.

Most certainly agree.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Sep 2014 05:39

Well Karan,if you look at the current sales of German U-boats,you will find that they are the most popular ones around.When we already possess 4 of them we should've pursued acquiring another batch if we wanted to enjoy the best of both the east and west and building upon our experience of operating U-boats.The Greeks went bankrupt ,couldn't pay for their subs and started making excuses for rejecting them.The Israeli Dolfin is possibly the most sophisticated western origin conventional AIP sub today,two sets of TTs,able to fire N-tipped cruise missiles.Please read about it .

The Scorpenes,first batch ,will not come with AIP,only the last two and the Non-AIP ones are ridiculously expensive,5 years late too,why some in the IN feel that by the time we have the lot in service,they would be on the obsolescence trail.The Scorpene's weaponry leaves much to be desired.It will have inferior anti-ship missile systems,not even equiv. to the Klub with its Mach 3+ terminal warhead version,only subsonic SM-Exocets.The torpedoes again have yet to be selected.The virtues of MESMA as against fuel cell AIP systems ,which are more popular,have yet to be determined too.

TSarkar.Russian/Soviet mil. eqpt. while not as sophisticated as Western systems,come in much cheaper,far sturdier and can take more punishment,subs for instance.We've decades of operating Russian origin eqpt. and it has been a v. successful partnership despite the problems with spares,support,etc.in the past,which are being resolved from numerous media reports.Talk to veteran IN submariners and ask them about the same.The US rates the Kilos v.highly.Why they've been exercising with NATO conventional subs to sharpen their capability against them.The Kilos ,late model ones,are still in series production,selling v.well ,the 6 for Vietnam being built at record speed,and are even being built for the RuN .Plus they come in at half the cost of a Scorpene.Since the IN has effectively lost 2 Kilos,the virtually brand new SRakshak and the one dismantled at Vizag,the easiest way to augment numbers in the interim before settling upon the design for the 75I programme,was to have ordered two new boats,either Kilos or Amurs.there was a report about the option of leasing two.

However,as I've been stressing for a long time,the IN really needs nuclear subs and building a parallel line of SSGN variants of the ATV would give us the best capability to operate in any ocean,with long endurance,esp. to deal with the rapidly escalating threat from China.

The hard fact is that it has only been Russia which has given us affordable cutting edge tech.Like MKIs,N-sub tech,Akulas,BMos,etc. for decades (Israeli in recent times has delivered a lot of key eqpt. like the Phalcons,etc.). There is no equal to BMos in the West for example.Read western prof. writings on the threat it brings with it,Klub too.Top of the line Western mil. tech was not available until recently.If the US/West opened its mil.tech stores and offered us what we want without strings,at affordable prices,no problem whatsoever! The services can choose "horses for courses" as I've always maintained.

But look at the Indo-Japanese N-deal.It is being delayed because the US is putting pressure upon Japan to get India to sign on for intrusive inspections.Capping and controlling India's N-weapons programme is of crucial importance to the West.They want to shackle us through various agreements and the MMS N-deal which demanded separation of our civilian N-plants from those linked with the weapons programme has been detrimental to our strategic deterrent.From the Clinton days,a deal was made between the US and China to cripple India's strat. deterrent.The US mistakenly thought that China would play ball with it ,but are now realising its mistake. If Western weapon systems come with strings attached that will cripple us in a crisis,then they should be avoided at all costs.

However,ultimately,the max. amount of indigenous systems that we can produce will ensure (hopefully) a smooth chain of support and self-suficiency.Unless the pvt. sector is involved in a massive way,the experience of the DPSUs shows that state run entities results are afflicted with the "chalta hai" disease as our PM told the DRDO. I can't see for the next 2 decades though a huge shift to only indigenous systems as we have along way to go in many spheres,esp. engine tech.The new dispensation is giving a much needed thrust to indigenous weapons production,the Avro replacements,LUH,etc.,but we've a long hard road to travel.

This is excellent news.
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 140_1.html
Navy may go for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
Press Trust of India | New Delhi

The Navy today said it was working on the design of the second indigenous aircraft carrier which may be propelled by a nuclear-powered engine.

The design is at a conceptual stage, Director General of Naval Design Bureau Rear Admiral Atul Saxena said when asked if the force was considering using nuclear-powered engine for it.

The Navy is already constructing the 40,000 tonne first indigenous aircraft carrier at the Cochin Shipyard Limited and has plans of building one more such vessel which is expected to be more than 60,000 tonnes in weight.

He said the force will take some time before freezing the design of the aircraft carrier as several options are being considered for various aspects such as aircraft take-off and landing facilities.

India has plans of having a fleet of three aircraft carriers. One each would be deployed on the eastern and western sea-boards and the third would be used as a reserve.

Talking to reporters ahead of the golden jubilee celebrations of the Naval Design Bureau, Saxena said the Navy has developed immense capabilities in terms of ship designing and is focusing on cutting down the ship building time as part of its focus area.

He said in the times of changing face of warfare, the Navy design team is also looking at designing multi-role warships which can be used for diversified operations such as conventional warfare, disaster relief or anti-piracy operations.

Saxena said the force has increased the stealth feature on the ships designed by it and built indigenously by government shipyards in the last few years.

September 23, 2014

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Sep 2014 07:19

GSAT-7 bolsters Indian Navy's Network Centric Warfare (NCW) capability

Effective maritime domain awareness (MDA) in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) is a strategic imperative for the Indian Navy (IN). Achieving this goal dovetails with IN's continuing evolution as a network-centric force with consistent investment being made in various command, control, communications, computers and intelligence, surveillance, targeting and reconnaissance (C4ISTAR) programs. IN's emerging network centric warfare (NCW) ethos ultimately paves the way towards true MDA by providing a core around which broader inter-agency networks can be built. The need to manage dispersed forces operating across wide expanses of ocean while keeping them informed is driving IN more than ever before to pursue space based initiatives as reflected by the operationalization of the GSAT-7 satellite whose efficacy was validated in the TROPEX series of exercises conducted earlier this year. IN's desire to operate a large fleet of nuclear submarines in the years ahead will only heighten its need to exploit space for NCW goals as well as spur further domestic development of very long range communication systems.

In recent years, IN has inducted a range of new ISR platforms including the Boeing P-8I Neptune and a host of UAVs besides upgrading older reconnaissance assets with new electronics to considerably augment its inventory of network capable platforms. But to actually achieve the old clich of moving from being a 'platform centric' to a 'network centric force', IN has known for some time now that it would have to deploy high bandwidth digital communications that facilitate 24x7 secure internet connectivity between its various assets and establishments.

As such IN's Weapons Engineering Electronics Establishment (WEESE) laboratory working together with Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and the Indian private sector created a first naval enterprise network in the mid-2000s which operated in the high frequency (HF) and very high frequency (VHF) spectrum but also employed very small aperture terminal (VSAT) Ku-band communications via GSAT class civilian satellites. However, the data bit rates and coverage footprint of this particular scheme were rather limited. At the same time IN's use of INMARSAT terminals for the same purpose wasn't exactly secure or cheap either.

It was clear that IN needed a dedicated multi-band satellite that could provide wide coverage and high data transmission rates thereby facilitating secure digital transmission of instructions, reports and intelligence in real time. This led to the conceptualization, creation and subsequent launch of GSAT-7 on board an Arianespace launcher in August 2013. Positioned at 74 degrees east, GSAT-7 weighs 2650 kg with a payload power of around 2 kilowatts (kW) and a designed mission life of 7- 9 years. Based on ISRO's I-2K bus, GSAT-7 carries payloads operating in the ultra high frequency (UHF), S, C and Ku-bands providing a great degree of versatility to relay various types of transmissions. GSAT-7's geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO) of 249-kilometre perigee, 35,929-kilometre apogee at an inclination of 3.5 degree with respect to the equator allows it to provide a coverage footprint of some 3600 km across IOR.

Now GSAT-7 was developed under Project Rukmini (GSAT-7 is also referred to Rukmini incidentally) which also included the deployment of new maritime VSATs on Indian naval ships. These VSATs have been supplied by Orbit Technology, Israel and are linked to a deploying ship's CIC computers, navigation and sensor equipment while being able to cater for the ship's roll, pitch and yaw and turning rate. The last part is a crucial aspect of maritime VSATs as their antennas need to be stabilized with respect to the horizon and true north, so that they maintains line of sight with the satellite overhead. VSATs supplied by Orbit are dual offset Gregorian terminals sporting 45 inch radomes for transmission and reception. Incidentally, domestic development of such VSATs is also under way at DLRL, Bangalore.

All of this now rides BEL's current Data Link-II system which is more capable than the older data link system mentioned above. Moreover Link-II is also being used by other Indian military services thereby paving the way for using GSAT-7 as a 'jointness' tool as well. Indeed, GSAT-7 though under the operational control of IN will likely become a part of the envisaged Aerospace Command that the new Modi-led government is definitely looking to expedite. Indian military NCW growth may require a certain amount of pooling of resources, especially in the space based segment.

One example of this is already underway in the form of the Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS) which is expected to give the Indian military, positioning and targeting independence in and around IOR. Two of the intended seven satellites for the constellation, IRNSS-1A and 1B have already been parked in geosynchronous orbits in space and once fully operational by end 2015, IRNSS is expected to provide a positioning accuracy of less than 15 metres across IOR. IRNSS signals will be in the L5 and S bands broadcast through a phased array antenna to maintain continuous coverage and signal strength. The importance of IRNSS for secure C&C activities by IN cannot be overstated. The entire NCW concept ultimately hinges on the ability to securely leverage geographically referenced information that allows military commanders to utilize multi-faceted data to both locate friendly forces as well as direct networked fires towards the opponent's platforms and nodes. However at the crux of any such geographical information system (GIS) riding an enterprise network is the availability of accurate and uninterrupted global positioning and navigational data from an overhead satellite constellation which is what IRNSS will provide.

Ultimately it is the interplay of GIS data and target information from space based reconnaissance assets that enable the business end of NCW. And when the playground is the vast expanse of open ocean itself, space enabled NCW can really come into its own in a veritable game of 'digital battleship'. Thus despite having smaller resources at its disposal as compared to the Indian Air force(IAF) or the Indian Army(IA), IN has pushed ahead with space based NCW enablers. Indeed even with a relatively small budget at the time, IN joined the other two services in funding some aspects of the Technology Experimental Satellite (TES) launched in 2001. TES demonstrated some very important attributes for military satellites including a new generation attitude and orbit control system, high torque reaction wheels, a new reaction control system with optimized thrusters and a single propellant tank, light weight spacecraft structure, solid state recorder, X-band phased array antenna, improved satellite positioning system, miniaturized TTC and power system and two-mirror-on- axis camera optics. TES also sports a panchromatic camera with a spatial resolution of 1m, and an experimental synthetic aperture radar (SAR). TES actually paved the way for RISAT-I and even the OCEANSAT series of satellites which provide maritime movement, ocean topography, sea state and bathymetric data to IN. Bathymetric data is of course particularly useful for IN's submarine fleet.

In the future, IN will also operate electronic intelligence (ELINT) satellites that will track electromagnetic emissions in the maritime domain to get a fix on target. However whether it is electro-optical data or SAR data or signals intercept data, the system will ultimately depend on communication satellites of the GSAT-7 variety. During TROPEX-2014 GSAT-7 handled large amounts of C&C and targeting data with good signal strength to make the missile firing exercise a success. However TROPEX-14 also demonstrated that just one GSAT-7, though significant, will not be adequate given IN's expanding footprint and the need to tie in more space based GIS and reconnaissance tools.

Indeed the space based segment for IN will have to grow in tandem with its induction of more nuclear submarines that will need a complex communications system that can maintain C&C over them without compromising their operational doctrine which hinges to a great extent on stealth. Now no matter how many overhead assets IN manages to deploy, its submarines will always have to stay incommunicado for certain lengths of time to retain the advantage of surprise.

In order to send coded instructions to them when they are lurking in silent mode as a precursor to more detailed C&C and targeting data, very long range narrow band communications are essential. This is why IN has also invested heavily in very low frequency (VLF) and extremely low frequency (ELF) systems. One such facility was inaugurated recently as INS Kattaboman, Tamil Nadu. This facility, featuring the highest mast structures in India has been built by Larsen & Turbo with antennas developed by DLRL. VLF transmissions can reach submarines lurking at a depth of 20 meters and consist of short instructions usually related to spatial deployment or weapons employment. For ballistic missile submarines however ELF may be required as they lurk at deeper depths, if not for anything but to bring them to the surface. IN no doubt wishes to replicate USN's Submarine Satellite Information Exchange Sub-System (SSIXS) and for that being able to send instructions to bring submarines to a depth where they can use UHF communications is imperative.

Going forward the picture is one of IN ships being 24x7 internet capable with each other, and connected to shore headquarters forming the backbone of the National C3I system which connects with the Coastal Security Network and has establishments in some IOR island states to pave the way for an Indian led MDA framework in the Ocean that bears its name.

Follow Saurav Jha on twitter @SJha1618. Send your feedback geekatlarge1618@gmail.com

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Sep 2014 16:57

First open visit of a PLAN sub to an IOR littoral nation.
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0&cid=1101

PLA sub's Sri Lanka visit shows China power projection in Indian Ocean

Staff Reporter
2014-09-25
The Changzheng 2, a Type 091 Han-class nuclear-powered submarine, has become the first Chinese submarine to visit Colombo in Sri Lanka, according to the website of the state-run Sri Lanka News on Sept. 15.

The submarine arrived at the Port of Colombo one day before China's president, Xi Jinping, arrived in the country on Sept. 16. In addition to the Changzheng 2, there were two other PLA Navy warships in port.

The Changzheng 2 is under the command of the PLA Navy's North Sea Fleet. Equipped with C-801 anti-ship missiles, it is capable of attacking targets 80 kilometers away.
Duowei News stated that the submarine that visited Colombo on Sept. 15 was in fact a Type 039 Song-class conventional submarine. The North Sea Fleet's Changxingdao submarine salvage vessel was also there to accompany the submarine.

Duowei said that this is the first time that a Chinese submarine has openly visited a nation in the Indian Ocean. Furthermore, Xi Jinping is the first Chinese leader to visit Sri Lanka in 28 years, though he was only there for one day. Taken together with the joint naval exercises with Iran launched Wednesday, this seems to suggest China's ambitions to project its military power into the Indian Ocean, according to Duowei.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Sep 2014 22:40

Don't Buy Your Aircraft Carrier from Russia
India learned the hard way with INS Vikramaditya

September 19, 2014
By Kyle Mizokami

Don't Buy Your Aircraft Carrier from Russia
India learned the hard way with INS Vikramaditya

Like a lot of countries, India wants the best weapons it can afford. But ideological and financial concerns mean there are a lot of things it won’t buy from the United States or Europe. That pretty much leaves, well, Russia.
India has been a big buyer of Russian weapons for 50 years. Those haven’t been easy years for New Delhi. India’s defense contracts with Russia have consistently suffered delays and cost overruns. And the resulting hardware doesn’t always work.
Of all India’s Russian procurement woes, none speak more to the dysfunctional relationship between the two countries than the saga of INS Vikramaditya. In the early 2000s, India went shopping for a new aircraft carrier. What followed was a military-industrial nightmare.
Wanted—One New(ish) Carrier
In 1988, the Soviet Union commissioned the aircraft carrier Baku. She and her four sisters of the Kiev class represented a unique Soviet design. The front third resembled a heavy cruiser, with 12 giant SS-N-12 anti-ship missiles, up to 192 surface-to-air missiles and two 100-millimeter deck guns. The remaining two-thirds of the ship was basically an aircraft carrier, with an angled flight deck and a hangar.
Baku briefly served in the Soviet navy until the USSR dissolved in 1991. Russia inherited the vessel, renamed her Admiral Gorshkov and kept her on the rolls of the new Russian navy until 1996. After a boiler room explosion, likely due to a lack of maintenance, Admiral Gorshkov went into mothballs.
In the early 2000s, India faced a dilemma. The Indian navy’s only carrier INS Viraat was set to retire in 2007. Carriers help India assert influence over the Indian Ocean—not to mention, they’re status symbols. New Delhi needed to replace Viraat, and fast.
India’s options were limited. The only countries building carriers at the time—the United States, France and Italy—were building ships too big for India’s checkbook. In 2004, India and Russia struck a deal in which India would receive Admiral Gorshkov. The ship herself would be free, but India would pay $974 million dollars to Russia to upgrade her.
It was an ambitious project. At 44,500 tons, Admiral Gorshkov was a huge ship. Already more than a decade old, she had spent eight years languishing in mothballs. Indifference and Russia’s harsh winters are unkind to idle ships.
Russia would transform the vessel from a helicopter carrier with a partial flight deck to an aircraft carrier with a launch ramp and a flight deck just over 900 feet long. She would be capable of supporting 24 MiG-29K fighters and up to 10 Kamov helicopters.
She would have new radars, new boilers for propulsion, new arrester wires for catching landing aircraft and new deck elevators. All 2,700 rooms and compartments—spread out over 22 decks—would be refurbished and new wiring would be laid throughout the ship. The “new” carrier would be named Vikramaditya, after an ancient Indian king.
A real aircraft carrier for less than a billion dollars sounds almost too good to be true. And it was.
Shakedown
In 2007, just a year before delivery, it became clear that Russia’s Sevmash shipyard couldn’t meet the ambitious deadline. Even worse, the yard demanded more than twice as much money—$2.9 billion in total—to complete the job.
The cost of sea trials alone, originally $27 million, ballooned to a fantastic $550 million.
A year later, with the project still in disarray, Sevmash estimated the carrier to be only 49-percent complete. Even more galling, one Sevmash executive suggested that India should pay an additional $2 billion, citing a “market price” of a brand-new carrier at “between $3 billion and $4 billion.”
For its part, Sevmash claimed that the job was proving much more complicated than anyone had ever imagined. Nobody had tried converting a ship into an aircraft carrier since World War II.
Sevmash specialized in submarine construction and had never worked on an aircraft carrier before. The ship had been originally built at the Nikolayev Shipyards, which after the breakup of the Soviet Union became part of the Ukraine. The tooling and specialized equipment used to build Admiral Gorshkov was thousands of miles away and now in a foreign country.
Like many contractors, defense or otherwise, Sevmash had its unhappy employer over a barrel. With the job halfway done, and having already dropped $974 million, India could not afford to walk away from the deal. Russia knew it, and was blunt about India’s options. “If India does not pay up, we will keep the aircraft carrier,” one defense ministry official told RIA-Novosti.
“There Will Be Grave Consequences”
By 2009, the project was deadlocked and word was starting to get around the defense industry. Russian arms exports for 2009 totaled $8 billion, and Sevmash’s delays and extortionary tactics weren’t good for the Russian defense industry as a whole.
In July 2009, Russia’s then-president Dmitri Medvedev made a high-profile visit to the Sevmash shipyard. Indian news reported that the carrier was still half-done, meaning that the yard had done virtually no work on the ship for two years as it held out for more money.
Medvedev publicly scolded Sevmash officials. “You need to complete [Vikramaditya] and hand it over our partners,” the visibly irritated president told Sevmash general director Nikolai Kalistratov.
“Otherwise,” he added, “there will be grave consequences.”
In 2010, the Indian government agreed to more than double the budget for the carrier to $2.2 billion. This was less than the $2.9 billion Sevmash demanded, and much less than Sevmash’s suggested “market price” of $4 billion.
Suddenly, Sevmash magically started working harder—actually, twice as hard—and finished the other half of the upgrades in only three years. Vikramaditya finally entered sea trials in August 2012 and commissioned into the Indian navy in November 2013.
At the commissioning ceremony, Indian Defense Minister AK Anthony expressed relief that the ordeal was over, telling the press that there was a time “when we thought we would never get her.”
Enduring Woes
Now that Vikramaditya is finally in service, India’s problems are over, right? Not by a long shot. Incredibly, India has chosen Sevmash to do out-of-warranty work on the ship for the next 20 years.
Keeping Vikramaditya supplied with spare parts will be a major task in itself. Ten Indian contractors helped to build the carrier, but so did more than 200 other contractors in Russia, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Finland, France, Norway, Poland, Sweden and the U.K. Some countries, particularly Japan, were likely unaware they were exporting parts for a foreign weapons system.
The ship’s boilers, which provide Vikramaditya with power and propulsion, are a long-term concern. All eight boilers are new. But yard workers discovered defects in them. During her trip from Russia to India, the flattop suffered a boiler breakdown, which Sevmash chalked up to poor-quality Chinese firebricks.
China denied ever exporting the firebricks.
Finally, Vikramaditya lacks active air defenses. The ship has chaff and flare systems to lure away anti-ship missiles, but she doesn’t have any close-in weapons systems like the American Phalanx.
India could install local versions of the Russian AK-630 gun system, but missiles will have to wait until the ship is in drydock again—and that could be up to three years from now. In the meantime, Vikramadita will have to rely on the new Indian air-defense destroyer INS Kolkata for protection from aircraft and missiles.
As for Sevmash? After the Vikramaditya fiasco, the yard is strangely upbeat about building more carriers … and has identified Brazil as a possible buyer. “Sevmash wants to build aircraft carriers,” said Sergey Novoselov, the yard’s deputy general director.
That almost sounds like a threat.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 25 Sep 2014 22:44

Old crap being peddled in that farticle.

vipins · Post by **vipins** » 25 Sep 2014 23:14

CCS nod to Rs1,000 crore deal for procuring Barak missiles

The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is understood to have cleared the deal for procuring the Israeli air defence missiles which would be deployed on Navy’s aircraft carriers that are sans air defence missile systems to target an incoming enemy aircraft or missile, sources said in New Delhi. The missiles are to be put on board aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya and INS Virat — Navy’s two operational warships which have been without air defence cover.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 26 Sep 2014 11:06

Good that it will be the last carrier to be imported.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 26 Sep 2014 12:46

vipins wrote:CCS nod to Rs1,000 crore deal for procuring Barak missiles
The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) is understood to have cleared the deal for procuring the Israeli air defence missiles which would be deployed on Navy’s aircraft carriers that are sans air defence missile systems to target an incoming enemy aircraft or missile, sources said in New Delhi. The missiles are to be put on board aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya and INS Virat — Navy’s two operational warships which have been without air defence cover.

I think UPA and all media need to public ally apologize for exposing the Indian navy for catastrophe just to Bring down NDA and more particularly George Fernandes and former Naval chief Sushil Kumar.

These missiles were needed and there was no prima facie evidence for kickbacks, it was irresponsible of them not to equip crictical naval assets like INS Vikram Aditya with these.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Sep 2014 01:59

Xcellent news.The "Saint" would've been on bended knees praying to "Our lady of Italy" for a divine sign to proceed on the decision! One only hopes that the Israelis do not delay B-8 any further as "INS Kal",supposed to defend the VikA,lacks any air defence missiles at all!

As posted earlier,in future all carriers will be designed in India,the next carrier of 65K t poss. with nuclear propulsion.Here is a fine tribute to the DND celebrating its 50th year.

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 010_1.html

119 warships built, naval design celebrates golden jubilee
Ajai Shukla
September 26, 2014

A day after the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) highlighted India's scientific capability by placing the spaceship, Mangalyaan, in orbit around Mars, another milestone in indigenous design was celebrated in New Delhi on September 25: The 50th anniversary of the Directorate of Naval Design (DND).

Even as the air force and army import the bulk of their equipment requirements, the DND has spearheaded the navy's striking success in "making in India". Over the last half century, it has produced 19 separate designs - from small coastal vessels in the 1960s; through increasingly sophisticated frigates and destroyers, to India's first indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, which Cochin Shipyard is currently building.

"Over the years our naval ship designers have designed, and our shipyards have constructed, 119 warships," said navy chief, Admiral Robin Dhowan, while felicitating the DND on Thursday.

Interestingly, India was building world-class warships two centuries ago. In 1817, Mumbai Docks (today the Naval Dockyard) built HMS (Her Majesty's Ship) Trincomalee, the oldest warship afloat, which is currently berthed in Hartlepool, UK. Mumbai Docks also built HMS Minden, on which Francis Scott Key composed America's national anthem, The Star Spangled Banner, in Baltimore. Also built in Mumbai was the HMS Cornwallis, on which China signed the Treaty of Nanking, ceding Hong Kong to the British in 1842.

After independence, when the navy took the far-reaching strategic decision to build, rather than buy, its warships, a Corps of Naval Constructors was set up in 1956. In 1964, this evolved into the Central Design Office, the forerunner of today's Directorate of Naval Design.

Tellingly, neither the army nor the air force have their own design agency - and they have achieved little success in indigenisation. Analysts are unanimous that the DND, with its present corps of 350 uniformed warship designers, has been instrumental in the navy's successful indigenisation.

Its first major success came in the late 1970s, when it designed the Godavari-class frigate. For a decade before that, the DND had cut its teeth on the British-designed Leander-class frigates, which were being built in India. The last two Leanders featured modifications by the DND, especially to their helicopter deck.

Even so, experts were taken aback by INS Godavari. A heavily armed frigate that weighed 1,000 tonnes more than the Leanders, the 3,600-tonne Godavari could actually sail faster than the highly regarded British warship.

On 3rd April 1989, the cover of Time magazine featured INS Godavari, with a cover story entitled, "Superpower India."

Buoyed by the Godavari, the DND began developing the ambitious 6,200-tonne Delhi-class guided missile destroyer in the late 1980s. The three warships of this class - INS Delhi, Mumbai and Mysore - are acknowledged as exceptionally handsome warships. Their sturdy design and sea-keeping ability was also acknowledged when INS Delhi spent two days in cyclone in the South China Sea, en route to China. Following that came the 6,200-tonne Shivalik class multi-role frigates, which saw increasing levels of indigenization.

"I have had the privilege of serving on each of these classes of ships… As a user I can vouch (for the fact) that these are some very fine ships, very potent ships. I would like to salute the professionalism of our naval designers", declared Admiral Dhowan.

The DND's golden jubilee year has seen the commissioning of three DND-designed warships - the new guided missile destroyer, INS Kolkata; the first anti-submarine corvette, INS Kamorta; and an offshore patrol vessel, INS Sumitra. Another 41 indigenously designed warships are currently being built in Indian shipyards.

While lauding the DND, the navy chief pointed out that more should be done to indigenise weapons and sensors - the so-called "fight capability" of a warship. India had indigenised 90 per cent of its warships' "float capability", or its hull structure; and 60 per cent of their "move capability", or engines, transmission and propellers. Only INS Kamorta had to fitted a range of indigenous sensors and weapons to emerge 90 per cent indigenous.

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 27 Sep 2014 10:16

Philip wrote:Xcellent news.The "Saint" would've been on bended knees praying to "Our lady of Italy" for a divine sign to proceed on the decision! One only hopes that the Israelis do not delay B-8 any further as "INS Kal",supposed to defend the VikA,lacks any air defence missiles at all!

As posted earlier,in future all carriers will be designed in India,the next carrier of 65K t poss. with nuclear propulsion.Here is a fine tribute to the DND celebrating its 50th year.

Stop dis cribbing about past things....every one have there goods and bads...more over they have lost the power for wat they have done...one can question the efficiency of d work but some members here go to extent of accusing them of treason...everyone have skeletons in d cupboard did you forget coffins scam, did you forget how we lost 500 young soldiers bcoz of sum stupid decision to not to cross the loc and even more treason of not acknowledging the sacrifice of our matrys during op parakram...and did you forget who sanctioned agni 5, barak 8, c17, increased funding for LCA etc i can go on but it amounts ranting which is against forum rules...so plz refrain from this cribbing, they have lost for wat they have done.

We as members of responsible forum should criticise d decision than d man behing it...if you hav some facts put forth them than indulging in naming calling, below d belt comments.

no offence against any one but it is just my humble opinion.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Sep 2014 11:54

ravip wrote:
Philip wrote:Xcellent news.The "Saint" would've been on bended knees praying to "Our lady of Italy" for a divine sign to proceed on the decision! One only hopes that the Israelis do not delay B-8 any further as "INS Kal",supposed to defend the VikA,lacks any air defence missiles at all!

As posted earlier,in future all carriers will be designed in India,the next carrier of 65K t poss. with nuclear propulsion.Here is a fine tribute to the DND celebrating its 50th year.
Stop dis cribbing about past things....every one have there goods and bads...more over they have lost the power for wat they have done...one can question the efficiency of d work but some members here go to extent of accusing them of treason...everyone have skeletons in d cupboard did you forget coffins scam, did you forget how we lost 500 young soldiers bcoz of sum stupid decision to not to cross the loc and even more treason of not acknowledging the sacrifice of our matrys during op parakram...and did you forget who sanctioned agni 5, barak 8, c17, increased funding for LCA etc i can go on but it amounts ranting which is against forum rules...so plz refrain from this cribbing, they have lost for wat they have done.

We as members of responsible forum should criticise d decision than d man behing it...if you hav some facts put forth them than indulging in naming calling, below d belt comments.

no offence against any one but it is just my humble opinion.

ravip ji, pranam.

the decision was taken by the man with no knowledge or capability save his bended knee ability to prostrate before his italian mummy.

If the quality of the man is suspect then the quality of any decision taken by him is doubly suspect. Loyalty to the nation is quite different from that to a dynasty with roots abroad.

In his selfish desire to keep his mundu clean he has sadly soiled the mundu of the fighting men.

history will not remember this sad little man or his damned mundu in a kindly manner. It will take years to recover from his activities of deliberate inactivity that brought aid and comfort to people and situations that should have been dealt with severely in the national interest.

In any other right thinking country, his actions would have been correctly judged as bordering on treasonous but here it seems we are content to merely label it as "past" and it's eagerly forgiven because some bloody party has lost "power" as though that simple fact expiates every sin committed by the mundu and his cohorts.

BTW, what earthly use is the c17 to us except as a showpiece paperweight??

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 27 Sep 2014 13:58

chetak wrote: ravip ji, pranam.

the decision was taken by the man with no knowledge or capability save his bended knee ability to prostrate before his italian mummy.

If the quality of the man is suspect then the quality of any decision taken by him is doubly suspect. Loyalty to the nation is quite different from that to a dynasty with roots abroad.

In his selfish desire to keep his mundu clean he has sadly soiled the mundu of the fighting men.

history will not remember this sad little man or his damned mundu in a kindly manner. It will take years to recover from his activities of deliberate inactivity that brought aid and comfort to people and situations that should have been dealt with severely in the national interest.

In any other right thinking country, his actions would have been correctly judged as bordering on treasonous but here it seems we are content to merely label it as "past" and it's eagerly forgiven because some bloody party has lost "power" as though that simple fact expiates every sin committed by the mundu and his cohorts.

BTW, what earthly use is the c17 to us except as a showpiece paperweight??

Admin Mulla's plz forgive me for going ot, but it is necessary.

It is easy to term C-17 acquisition as showpiece, but do you have any alternative to it? I would accept your point if there was an Indian built alternative, even if it was inferior to c17, but sadly there is none except c17 to cater for strategic airlift. Keeping aside this keyboard war of import lobby Vs indigenous, enlighten me with any one article at least from the retired servicemen saying c17 acquisition was not needed. Any how I was just giving it as an example, I can list many such decisions lets take example of forming strike corps which go on to prove tat he was not working against the nation or committing treason.

Let's come to the Italian madam issue, put some facts for healthy discussion abt soniya interfering in mod functions. Most allegations against Antony were tat he was slow decision maker wen there were corruption charges but I am yet come across any fact saying madam scuttled any defence acquisition programmes or interference in MOD. Not even one so if u have any Material directly implicating her then plz enlighten me wid d same.

It is ok to express anger over inefficiency once or twice but in every thread doing d same is nothing but hatred. Yes in some other country inefficiency could be treated as treason but they at least respect there elected representatives they may disagree wid there decision but dey don't indulge in hatred just look at how ppl disagree wid bush in us, but his desicions are much appreciated in India.

Coming to 'Italian' madam allegations...again I am yet come across any of the reports saying so... It has been an Internet sensation to connect anything wid italian conspiracy....but I agree tat Cong had taken money from defence allocation for other schemes...but you have to agree tat priority of cong cannot be d same as yours or mine. I don't know wat you will call d present govt just yesterday on a news x the bjp spokesperson Mr.sheshadri chari was stating on defence acquisition tat world has moved on & it is idiotic to invest on conventional military capability and further said if we invest in such capability we will be falling into the trap of western countries, and went on say if there will be any war it will be on d economic front and not on the military front. So here you can clearly deduce tat priorities of political parties and its strategist's may not be similar as yours, but however you can criticize them for d same but calling names portraying dem as tratitors would certainly not serve d purpose.
As alleged if 'Italian' madam had worked against d interest of the nation, den our country should have been in conditions much worse dan Pakistan fortunately it is not. Yes der might be corruption, corruption is different dan portraying ppl as working against the country and equate dem wid ppl like geelani or malik etc... let's see modi had promised to put ppl being d bars and I am yet to see anyone till now.

It is my last post on dis, I am not advising any one, it is my humble opinion on kind of hatred being seen in many threads. Bcoz we are certainly not Paki's who are known to do so And see conspiracy in everything.