Indian Naval Discussion

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 06 Jul 2011 07:08

Abingdonboy wrote:Video of IN VBSS teams being trained by IN MARCOs (the ones in Camo are the MARCOs trainers)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3iwidSp2Zc

Great vid + awesome music- shows how well trained IN VBSS teams are (getting their training from the best!) and shows the MARCOS showing some of their skills (shooting, beach assault etc).

Enjoy!

Thanks for posting that. It was an amazing video. BTW does anyone have the pics shown in the vid where the MARCOS are training at sea shore? Those were awesome pics and I would be very grateful if someone could share them.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jul 2011 07:20

When a foreign supplier delays,one must investigate why.I was re-reading the Flanker in IAF service a few nights ago.Great book,very insightful and even here there were great delays in the MKI version,because the Indian side had not anticipated the complxity of the task,integrating Indian,Israeli,French and Russian avionics,etc.

Now in the case of the frigates from Russia,these will be improved versions of the first three Talwars and they are to carry the Brahmos missile instead of Klub.Will they also be armed with the Barak BPDMS or stay with Kashtan? We are still in the dark about final levels of eqpt.,sensors and weaponry.Info not being available,let's leave the issue of delay and responsibilities to the IN and the builder for now.Let's also not forget that we are experiencing delays with almost every foreign supplier,whether it be for Hawk trainers,Scorpene subs,delayed by a few years,apart from the well-known Russian orders.In the case of the Akula-2,there is a definite required element of secrecy in its delivery,as it also has implications for the ATV programme and training of several sets of crew to man our future N-subs.We have official reports previously of the IN sending several naval teams to Russia for training on (N) subs. Finally,what about the delays in Indian yards too?!! How long has it taken for the Shivalik's to arrive? Our delays are far greater than any foreign supplier.The reason for these delays to me is that in the case of warships and subs,the time between design freeze and delivery sees a lot of tech and doctrinal developments in between and the temptation to incorporate these developments is often too strong.So on would then see combat systems to be tweaked,etc.etc.A case in point is the troubled history of Oz's Collins class subs,Swedish designed,with Oz modifications-a failure and then upgraded by the US at a cost of billions and now not even a single sub is seaworthy!

As far as sub numbers/MOD's interpretation goes,the requirement for amphibians finally saw the light of day (after 10+ yrs. of my pleading for it!).Hopefully,the requirement of a new class of mini/midget subs,outside the numbers required for blue-water ops will find acceptance by the MOD.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 06 Jul 2011 07:45

Russia to bid for Indian Navy submarine tender

"There is a new tender, with the new requirements, and together with [Russia's] Rubin design bureau we are making a proposal to India for Amur 650 class submarines," RIA Novosti quoted Oleg Azizov, head of Rosoboronexport’s delegation at the IMDS exhibition and Chief of Navy Special Equipment and Services Export Department, as saying.

To strengthen the navy's depleted fleet, Indian Navy is planning to commission around 12 submarines in the next decade.

“Amur class is a fourth-generation vessel, and Russia has all chances to win the tender," he added.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Jul 2011 09:42

unless they know something we dont, why is the smallest of the amur family being put forward? pretty weak specs - nothing beyond a coastal patrol sub and for that why do we need AIP ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amur_class_submarine

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 06 Jul 2011 10:25

Every time the Bulava missile fails, the time line for Akula-2 is being moved back and Russia demands more money for something. Now Bulava had been tested successfully, I am guessing that inducting of Akula-2 will be speedy. My feeling is that we are not only getting sling, but also stones too. Its just my guess only.

JVKrishnan · Post by **JVKrishnan** » 06 Jul 2011 11:04

Singha wrote:unless they know something we dont, why is the smallest of the amur family being put forward? pretty weak specs - nothing beyond a coastal patrol sub and for that why do we need AIP ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amur_class_submarine

It is amur 1650 that's being offered, not 650. Not sure if it was a typo or DDM

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jul 2011 11:20

JV is right.The 1650 model with B'Mos was the one on display at previous def. shows.However,I do not think that that model had an AIP module as part of the package.I'm sure that the size would grow considerably,probably around 2500t if it is so along with VLS B'Mos missiles.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 06 Jul 2011 11:25

anishns wrote:Don't you know? They are "re-structuring"

Surya wrote:Hey why blame them when the assorted Rodina lovers will come out and defend and justify them.

Yeah what's 30 years of re-structuring between friends

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jul 2011 12:28

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/152 ... -subs.html

India’s secret base for N-subs underway
Kalyan Ray, New Delhi, April 9, DHNS:

India’s first operational base for nuclear submarines, being developed secretly, for which the government has sanctioned close to Rs 160 crore in the new budget is underway, sources told Deccan Herald.

The “INS Arihant” was launched in July 2009. Initially, it was to undergo sea trial for two years before induction. Now, the deadline has been pushed to 2012 though the Navy did not elaborate on the reasons for delay. Two indigenous nuclear subs that are believed to be under construction are likely to be ready by 2020.

New Delhi is also understood to have signed a secret $650 million inter-governmental agreement with Moscow for leasing the second Akula class submarine to the navy for three years.

However, there is delay in the leasing process too, the reason for which may be the absence of a suitable parking place for the boomers.

The berthing facility created for the INS Chakra—the Akula class nuclear submarine which India hired from Russia in 1989 for years—has long been taken up for other purposes.

The quote will explain perhaps why there has been a delay in inducting the sub,as base facilities for our N-subs are yet to be ready.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 06 Jul 2011 12:54

Philip wrote:http://www.deccanherald.com/content/152 ... -subs.html

India’s secret base for N-subs underway
Kalyan Ray, New Delhi, April 9, DHNS:

India’s first operational base for nuclear submarines, being developed secretly, for which the government has sanctioned close to Rs 160 crore in the new budget is underway, sources told Deccan Herald.

The “INS Arihant” was launched in July 2009. Initially, it was to undergo sea trial for two years before induction. Now, the deadline has been pushed to 2012 though the Navy did not elaborate on the reasons for delay. Two indigenous nuclear subs that are believed to be under construction are likely to be ready by 2020.

New Delhi is also understood to have signed a secret $650 million inter-governmental agreement with Moscow for leasing the second Akula class submarine to the navy for three years.

However, there is delay in the leasing process too, the reason for which may be the absence of a suitable parking place for the boomers.

The berthing facility created for the INS Chakra—the Akula class nuclear submarine which India hired from Russia in 1989 for years—has long been taken up for other purposes.

The quote will explain perhaps why there has been a delay in inducting the sub,as base facilities for our N-subs are yet to be ready.

This article is tooooo good to be true...summarising
1) New secret sub base
2) Arihant induction in 2012
3) 2 more new-clear subs
4) additional Akula-II - for 3 years??? why only 3 when the first was for 10 yrs

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 06 Jul 2011 13:09

4) additional Akula-II - for 3 years??? why only 3 when the first was for 10 yrs

Interesting point, if the 3 years is correct.

If it is:

a) After the problem with the 1st Akula, a wait and watch.
b) Maybe the 3 years is co-terminus with the second two of our nuclear subs being both inducted?

John · Post by **John** » 06 Jul 2011 17:25

Philip wrote:Now in the case of the frigates from Russia,these will be improved versions of the first three Talwars and they are to carry the Brahmos missile instead of Klub.Will they also be armed with the Barak BPDMS or stay with Kashtan? We are still in the dark about final levels of eqpt.,sensors and weaponry.Info not being available,let's leave the issue of delay and responsibilities to the IN and the builder for now.

Sensors for Teg will be similar to Talwar only major difference will be brahmos and barak-1/Ak-630 fit.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 06 Jul 2011 20:09

Philip wrote:JV is right.The 1650 model with B'Mos was the one on display at previous def. shows.However,I do not think that that model had an AIP module as part of the package.I'm sure that the size would grow considerably,probably around 2500t if it is so along with VLS B'Mos missiles.

I think it is Amur 950 which has the missile section.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 07 Jul 2011 00:00

Philip said
The quote will explain perhaps why there has been a delay in inducting the sub,as base facilities for our N-subs are yet to be ready

Just when you think you have heard of all defenses - along comes this

Aha I see - the sub which everyone knows we are getting did not have the secret base which we all know is not ready hence the sub has not been delivered (in secret)

Ding ding - now I know why the aircraft carrier has not been delivered. Phase 2 of Karwar base is not done. Stupid SDRE's ordering carriers and subs before bases are built

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 07 Jul 2011 00:23

^^Surya ji, Rodina Rakshaks have already made it clear that the Gorshkov is over-budget and delayed because stupid SDRE's did not recognize the size,scope and complexity of the work required to be done on it. Russians are all innojent onlee.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 07 Jul 2011 01:23

nachiket

this is all new!!!

I am not sure what can surpass this argument.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Jul 2011 02:08

Surya,do you know what facilities are required to support a nuclear sub? The old facilities used for the Chakra in the '80s no longer exist at Vizag and that was for just one sub ,an SSGN.We are to operate upto -as of now,5 SSBNs plus an unspecified number of SSGNs too.The base will have to have maintenance,repair and support facilties for nuclear reactors,missiles with nuclear warheads,safe storage of N-warheads,plus cruise missiles of varying models (Nirbhay,B'Mos,Klub,)torpedoes,hardened sub pens against nuclear attack and which can allow the ingress and egress of subs preferably without surfacing ,not to mention facilities for the large contingent of officers and submariners,enginering specialists,training facilities including n-sub simulators,etc.Then what about the civil facilities at the base for the naval families,etc.? Have you seen the size of an N-sub base? This base will be far more important than the one at Karwar as it has to support our entire sub-based strategic arsenal.
It is not a simple matter of just commisioning a new sub or warship,where existing types are already in service.

To give you just one small example,take a look here of the pics of a UK N-sub base in Scotland,uncovered by Google Earth.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 284752.ece
and at
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,506915,00.html

Close-up aerial views of the top-secret Naval base are on the computer program - available for free over the internet.
It even reveals the longitude and latitude of the facility in Faslane, Scotland - home to the UK's Trident-armed nuclear submarine force.
And pictures clearly show two vast Vanguard Class submarines - each capable of carrying 16 nuclear missiles.
Military experts warn that would make it easy for terrorists to launch accurate mortar or rocket attacks.
One told The Sun: "A strike on our nuclear capability would cause untold devastation. Terrorists could have a field day, knowing exactly where to aim strikes to cause the maximum devastation."
As well as HM Naval Base Clyde at Faslane, the program also clearly shows the Trident Special Area, just ten miles away, where nuclear warheads are stored.
And it can be used to pinpoint Britain's nuclear crisis HQ in Northwood, North London, MI6's London offices and the SAS training facility in Hereford.
Satellite pictures show the exact location of SAS sleeping quarters, office blocks, bunkers and parade grounds.
Our source said: "We should be censoring sensitive military sites, not only for the protection of the servicemen and women, but also for the protection of the country."
Military top brass are said to be furious that such sites can be viewed by anyone.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... z1RMVLhEFL

When the Akula arrives, and one expects that within a short time or perhaps even simultaneously the commisioning of the ATV/Arihant will take place,a new era-not just another chapter in Indian naval history will begin.We will truly have a "nuclear navy",joining the P-5 navies of the US,Russia,France,Britain and China.Details of the base and matters relating to our N-subs will be the most highly classified of all.Therefore try and read between the lines.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 04:02

Philip wrote:Surya,do you know what facilities are required to support a nuclear sub? The old facilities used for the Chakra in the '80s no longer exist at Vizag and that was for just one sub ,an SSGN.

If this were the reason why is Russia giving excuses on a regular basis about the delay in sub handover and IN only grumbles? did the accidental leak of toxic gases killing so many russian personnel to give Indian Navy to build Sub Pens... What about the demand for XXXmil$ for the second Akula-II which IN doesn't seem to want?
BTB, you might want to look up INS Vajrabahu, INS Virbahu, INS Satavahana, INS Kadamba... I rest my case here...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Jul 2011 04:49

A secret base for a not-secret nuclear sub?

Besides what ever happened to the news item that the IN had declined to pay for the second Russian nuclear sub? Is that a part of the drama, a plant, or bought out news paper guys?

I still think IN should invest in hydrophones.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 05:42

Natasha ki Noutanki...

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 07 Jul 2011 06:00

philip

And do you think the IN would just order a sub with no planning on where and how to maintain it??

and what does Russia care whether it is sitting in a dock or inside a cave??

was Chakra hidden inside a cave??

If so what happened to that cave??

cmon lets stop finding excuses for the non delivery

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 06:02

>> I still think IN should invest in hydrophones.

we are working on it. there was a blurb in one of the past techfocus issues.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 06:28

Rahul M wrote:>> I still think IN should invest in hydrophones.
we are working on it. there was a blurb in one of the past techfocus issues.

There was even a paper by one of the scientist working on this project and it was discussed threadbare in BRF. It think this the time when someone reported that an India kilo tailed a Ohio class for hours/days/weeks...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 06:40

first time I am hearing of this, the kilo-ohio thing.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 07:03

Rahul M wrote:first time I am hearing of this, the kilo-ohio thing.

I don't think it ever happened, but someone was claiming that... thought you might remember...
See the post from Gagan in this page
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... wrapheader

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Jul 2011 07:35

The Ohio as the SSBN has no need to come into the Indian Ocean. The SSGN is a different matter. Besides, any conventional boat lacks the endurance to track a nuke boat, beyond a few hrs as she will have to recharge her batteries and that will give away her position the moment the Diesels are switched on.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 07:55

the area marked out as rambili naval base in wikimapia is next to a large SEZ on the coast and has no hills on the shore. its just a patch of flat farmland and fish ponds.
it is wrongly marked probably?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Jul 2011 07:58

Kilo-Ohio is news. I recall a "story" about an IN sub popping up not too far from a USN ACarrier. That too seems far fetched.

Then there was a story of a Chinese sub doing the same.

And, then the Chinese ship cornering an Indian sub near the mouth of the Red Sea!!

Make good reading.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 08:00

I won't say that. if RN SSBNs operate in IOR, we can be sure ohio SSBNs do as well. a lot of their potential targets are in the region or can be targeted from here.
I don;t know if it is technically feasible for kilo to tail ohio, might not be impossible if the ohio is moving slowly but we can't come to any conclusion from the posts in that thread.

the chinese ship story was lifted from a hong kong tabloid, something like a chinse version of BR's mil scenarios thread.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Jul 2011 08:21

^^^

But its not like the SSBN will stalk each other. Besides, the Ru SSBN during the cold war operated out of North sea Bastions and east Pacific bastions, supported by surface and subsurface assets.

In addition Trident had sufficient range to hit any FSU target while fired from Atlantic and Pacific onlee. Moving them in IOR was too great a risk for the respective fleets.

But this is massively OT onlee..........

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 07 Jul 2011 08:47

Saab 2000 MPA with Selex AESA radar on offer to Indian Navy MRMR

The Saab 2000 multi-role Maritime Patrol Aircraft equipped with an AESA radar and a Saab RBS 15 anti-ship missiles is being offered to the Indian Navy to meet

Don't we have P8I for this role ??

Link

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 07 Jul 2011 08:52

The Indian Navy is already in the process of acquiring 5 new midget subs.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 09:18

>> But its not like the SSBN will stalk each other.

I fail to see the relevance of this comment.

>> Besides, the Ru SSBN during the cold war operated out of North sea Bastions and east Pacific bastions, supported by surface and subsurface assets.

bastion strategy was used primarily by the noisy delta classes,
a)because they were noisy and b) because their missiles had enough range to be used in that role.
earlier soviet SSB's deployed to the atlantic, hence all the hoopla about the GIUK gap.

I made a mistake in the above post though, RN SSN's operate in IOR, not SSBNs as I wrote.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 10:03

Singha wrote:the area marked out as rambili naval base in wikimapia is next to a large SEZ on the coast and has no hills on the shore. its just a patch of flat farmland and fish ponds.
it is wrongly marked probably?

Singha, the location Marked Rambili is WRONG, as you rightly said there is an SEZ coming there... Commie WKKs had even protested, organized local fishermen etc to protest against Nuclear Sub Base there. you can google for this news, widely reported in Chindu and local rags... BUT the base was not planned there... Navy denied any plans...
let us say, it is around 50-60 KM south of Vizag Radar Station on the east coast.
WIKIMAPIA is wrong

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 10:08

yeah I thought so too. looking at terrain I can guess where it really will be.

the southern half of pacific, atlantic and IOR are essentially one continuous deep unbroken open ocean with very few islands (so long as one avoids australia and the shallow island chains north of it ).....ideal area for NATO SSBNs...thats probably where they skulk around most and next being the arctic sea region.

they have even programmed the SLBMs with a empty null target in south pacific to guard against a accidential firing.

likewise southern IOR is probably our first SSBN operating area.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Jul 2011 10:13

Rahul M wrote:bastion strategy was used primarily by the noisy delta classes,
a)because they were noisy and b) because their missiles had enough range to be used in that role.

Bastion strategy was used because they could better protect their submarine assets compared to being let out in Atlantic ,not because it was noisy or silent , the notion that Delta 4 was noisy was also a myth but thats a different debate ( more noise subs were sent into Atlantic to track CBG ), the new SSBN will also follow a bastion strategy becuase its their policy no matter how capable these subs are , the area where they patrol can be controlled by RuN with surface,air and attack submarine , its their backyard and they have SOSUS like stuff deployed in the area to scan for unwelcome guest.

And yes you are right there was no need to go any where because the R-29U could target CONUS from those patrol areas.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 10:30

the strategy was used in the first place because RuN wasn't confident that their subs could stay undetected because they were noisier compared to their western counterparts, a confidence that USN for example has. the decision to base them in defendable zones arises from that factor. there are many problems with this strategy, chief of them being the adversary has a very good idea where the missiles are going to come from and worse, where to look for the subs.

and with that hump delta IV has to be very noisy. there's no evading physics.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 10:35

I figure in WW3 scenario, US would launch SLBMs in a dense grid into the waters of the white sea and barents sea in hopes of destroying or disrupting the Rus SSBNs known to be lurking there.

USN not only had the advantage of quieter subs, two oceans to disappear into, but also a shorter missile than the Sineva (15m). it was the size of the sineva missile that forced that hump on the delta and the other soln of enclosing similar (16m) missiles in smooth hull resulted in the giant typhoon.

trident d5 is 13.5m and fatter, with three stages all of composite. and its IOCed from 1990

20 yrs later the Borei and bulava equalizes the scales.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Jul 2011 10:52

Rahul M wrote:the strategy was used in the first place because RuN wasn't confident that their subs could stay undetected because they were noisier compared to their western counterparts, a confidence that USN for example has. the decision to base them in defendable zones arises from that factor. there are many problems with this strategy, chief of them being the adversary has a very good idea where the missiles are going to come from and worse, where to look for the subs.

and with that hump delta IV has to be very noisy. there's no evading physics.

So will they change that strategy because they get a brand new toy borei ? No ...... the real reason why they went for a bastion strategy is because they can better protect their strategic sub from known threats.

its also a myth that US submarine patrol the world ocean with ssbn , they too follow a similar strategy where they patrol in selected area which are defended by SSN and other assets like ruskies ( which is backyard for them ) and so does UK and france hence they ended with collision since they all end up almost at the same place to patrol and hide , ruskies ended open sea patrol once they got a slbm that could reach conus from patrol areas closer to home and not because of some noise disadvantage as is the popular myth.

Delta 4 noise level was no worse then ohio generally speaking , similar in narrow band and slightly worse in broad band due to hump and flow noise that it generated but its the former that mattered the most for long range detection and tracking of submarine. Delta 4 was the most silent SSBN in FSU better than typhoon even though typhoon had streamline hull designed and many layers of noise reduction but they still ended being a little more nosier than delta 4 , typhoon was a political solution to a problem and not what the navy wanted.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 11:21

Singha wrote:yeah I thought so too. looking at terrain I can guess where it really will be.

Can you email me your contact @ Shriniva$anm ATT gmal daat kaaaam. i have got some info on Rambili for you.