Indian Naval Discussion

prithvi · Post by **prithvi** » 26 Sep 2011 07:51

Pratyush wrote:^^^

WRT, the link posted above

Another lethal punch will come when India's own nuclear submarine, the over 6,000-tonne INS Arihant being built at Vizag, becomes operational next year.
They seem to be quite confident of the prospect that the Arihant will be in service by next year. If the expectation bears fruit, they it will be a wonderfull accomplishment in the history of Indian ship building. As they launched and commissioned a ship on time.

as much as I want this to happen..not going to happen unless UPA wants to use this as election gimmick..

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 26 Sep 2011 08:27

abduls, bliss to view some pics of SLINEX 2011

Note the awesome Shivalik

Shakinah truly as far as Frigates are concerned

more at: http://www.defence.lk/picturegallery/pi ... EX&cat=MOD
http://www.navy.lk/index.php?id=3156

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 26 Sep 2011 09:48

prithvi wrote:
as much as I want this to happen..not going to happen unless UPA wants to use this as election gimmick..

Defence in India historically has not been a vote getter. It wont be one in future.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 26 Sep 2011 10:47

Article in today's Hindu on L&T shipyard, Post in addition to SSridhar's post above.

Modern ship repair facility coming up near Chennai

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Sep 2011 13:06

Rs 3L cr plan to boost India's naval might

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 121043.cms

When Admiral Nirmal Verma on Saturday commissions the second fleet tanker from Italy, the 27,500-tonne INS Shakti, Navy's force-levels will stand at 132 ships, with just over 50 "major combatants" and 14 ageing submarines.

But the numbers will dip in the coming months, with older ships slated for retirement. China, in contrast, has close to 100 major warships and over 60 submarines, and is now increasingly flexing its muscles in international waters.

India cannot hope to match it. The good news, however, is there are 46 ships "on order" for Navy at different domestic shipyards, along with aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya (refitted Admiral Gorshkov) and three Talwar-class stealth frigates being built in Russia, say defence ministry sources.

Ranging from two aircraft carriers, six submarines and seven guided-missile destroyers to four anti-submarine warfare corvettes, nine naval off-shore patrol vessels and eight amphibious craft, the combined price tag for these 50 ships comes to over Rs 100,000 crore.

There are also two other major projects taking concrete shape now. One, the Rs 52,000 crore `Project-75India' to acquire six new-generation stealth submarines, equipped with land-attack missiles and air-independent propulsion, for which the global tender is now in the final stages. Six Scorpene submarines are already being constructed at Mumbai-based Mazagon Docks (MDL) for Rs 23,562 crore.

Then, seven more stealth frigates are to be built at MDL and GRSE (Kolkata) under Project-17A for around Rs 45,000 crore. This will follow the three 6,200-tonne stealth frigates built at MDL for Rs 8,101 crore, INS Shivalik, INS Satpura and INS Sahyadri, with only the last now left to be delivered.

Navy is also going in for new carrier-borne fighter jets and maritime patrol aircraft as well as multi-role helicopters and spy drones, which together will cost around Rs 85,000 crore. These include 45 Russian MiG-29Ks for $2 billion and 12 American P-8I long-range reconnaissance aircraft for over $3 billion.

The biggest warships currently under construction are the 44,570-tonne Vikramaditya and the 40,000-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) being built at Cochin Shipyard.

With Vikramaditya to be inducted by early-2013 and IAC by 2015, India hopes to deploy two potent carrier battle-groups by the middle of this decade. Another lethal punch will come when India's own nuclear submarine, the over 6,000-tonne INS Arihant being built at Vizag, becomes operational next year.

nits · Post by **nits** » 26 Sep 2011 16:13

India must pause before venturing into choppy waters

Given the strenuous efforts being made in New Delhi [ Images ], to maintain tranquility in Sino-Indian relations, and to provide impetus to burgeoning bilateral trade, this appears to be an inopportune moment to get involved in yet another sensitive issue. Even if India is about to take a, long overdue, stand on principles, or to adopt an assertive posture vis-a-vis China, a distant location like the South China Sea is hardly an ideal setting to demonstrate India's maritime or other strengths.

At this juncture it would be imprudent to contemplate sustaining a naval presence some 2500 nautical miles from home to bolster ONGC Videsh Ltd's stake in South China Sea hydrocarbons.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 26 Sep 2011 16:28

Six Indian Navy ships from Western Fleet sail into Kochi

animesharma · Post by **animesharma** » 26 Sep 2011 17:31

prahaar wrote:I have a query about the torpedo testing centre in Kyrgyzstadn: Why is such a facility developed in a lake (even though the weapon would mostly be used in sea conditions)? Other than legacy soviet ear technical base is there anything special about the place?

A little search about the lake in discussion yields following info:

*Its saline lake- hence redundant.
*length of 182 kilometres (113 mi)
*width of up to 60 kilometres (37 mi)
*Tenth largest lake in world.
*second largest mountain lake in world/
*It is surrounded by snow-capped peaks,but it never freezes.
*Altitude of 1,607 metres (5,272 ft).
*668 metres (2,192 ft) in depth.

And another interesting piece of info:

Russian Navy test site

During the Soviet period, the Soviet Navy operated an extensive facility at the lake's eastern end, where submarine and torpedo technology was evaluated.In March 2008, Kyrgyz newspapers reported that 866 hectares (2,140 acres) around the Karabulan Peninsula on the lake would be leased for an indefinite period to the Russian Navy, which is planning to establish new naval testing facilities as part of the 2007 bilateral Agreement on Friendship, Cooperation, Mutual Help, and Protection of Secret Materials. The Russian military will pay $4.5 million annually to lease the area. India also plans to invest in the facility to test all types of torpedoes such as heavy weight torpedoes and those that have thermal navigation system. Another advantage that works for the testing center is that the torpedoes fired can also be recovered allowing scientists to make physical verification of a torpedo structure for further study. India is also planning to use the torpedo test facility to test the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle being developed by NSTL. For this India has proposed to engage local companies with know-how in torpedo technology to further co-develop the facility.

Source:Wikipedia

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 26 Sep 2011 19:32

The Saint has just put on hold the JV between the Pipav and MDL.

Defence ministry puts Pipavav-Mazagaon Dock JV on hold

It seems that in order to stop a defense project in India. You just need to make unsubstantiated allegations against the project.

I hoe that the IN will not suffer from this the way the IA is suffering the 155 mm fiasco.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 26 Sep 2011 22:42

Tell his ministry to first answer why it cant even refer to a birth certificate and a calendar and arrive at an answer. Ministry of Indecisions.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 26 Sep 2011 23:18

Pratyush wrote: Defence ministry puts Pipavav-Mazagaon Dock JV on hold

Are you kidding me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hate these open-ended statements ... MOD will "soon" come out with "comprehensive" policy for dealing with things in a "transparent" way ... what a limbo ... Where is the "tears hair" emoticon?

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 26 Sep 2011 23:39

indranilroy wrote:
Pratyush wrote: Defence ministry puts Pipavav-Mazagaon Dock JV on hold
Are you kidding me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hate these open-ended statements ... MOD will "soon" come out with "comprehensive" policy for dealing with things in a "transparent" way ... what a limbo ... Where is the "tears hair" emoticon?

This is Anthony-speak for "I heard someone say a scam. I'll kill this process".

By this "putting-on-hold" logic, *any* loser in a defense tender can hold the entire country to ransom. Bet the same thing will happen when the tenders are opened for the $10 billion Vehicle contract for the Army.
I'll stick my neck out and say that he is the worst-ever Raksha Mantri in the history of India.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2011 04:42

There were serious concerns expressed about this JV in public media, so dont see why Antony is at fault here.

"Defence Minister AK Antony said on Monday the ministry will study the complaints received from some private shipyards regarding the JV. He didn’t elaborate on the nature of the complaints."

What is wrong with this statement: "Antony, addressing a meeting of the consultative committee attached to his ministry, a release of which was put on the government’s website, also said that JVs must compete for contracts and should not get them on nomination basis."

These are Indian shipyards.

"Seeking clarity on the issue, Bharati Shipyard in its letter, dated September 16, to MDL said that it has made a presentation on the proposal to form a JV with MDL on 23 August and was asked by the defence PSU two days later to provide further details and terms of reference for the formation of JV."

"Last week, L&T and ABG Shipyard had questioned the selection process, while pointing out the lack of transparency over the selection of Pipavav Shipyard as Mazagaon Dock Ltd’s JV partner."

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2011 04:44

The point is that several Indian yards were unhappy about the manner in which MOD had acquitted itself, and the MOD actually (to its credit) responded. MDL is not easy pickings and nor should it be. It has a $2 B orderbook and the process to choose the best partner should be open, transparent and best suited for national needs.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 27 Sep 2011 08:05

Karan M wrote:The point is that several Indian yards were unhappy about the manner in which MOD had acquitted itself, and the MOD actually (to its credit) responded. MDL is not easy pickings and nor should it be. It has a $2 B orderbook and the process to choose the best partner should be open, transparent and best suited for national needs.

Agreed. How do you know which complaint is genuine?

If the stakes are high, what the hell were MoD's representatives doing on the Board of Directors of Mazagon Docks Ltd? They are there for a reason. The reason is oversight. Clearly MoD failed to exercise that oversight. Or, the RM got cold feet when competitors started complaining.
Either way the country is the loser and MoD is to blame.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 27 Sep 2011 08:23

Karan ji,

I don't remember any selection process for Mahindra and Mahindra with NAL, neither do I remember any selection process for the L&T tie up for building the submarine hulls. They all happened because the private industry showed initiative ... and one must say that they both did exceptionally well and in the interest of India.

Similarly Pipapav build a big yard, took an initiative to tie up with MDL (I don't know if it involved bribes and frankly I could care less) ... but nonetheless we were on the verge of getting Pipapav going full steam with MDL which is overbooked ... Notice that Pipapav and MDL are geographically very close too which makes it ideal ... Instead now we have to wait for God-knows-when for rules worth hundreds of pages to come out before work can start at Pipapav in full gusto ... what a waste of resources at a time where we should be garnering if possible resource to speed up ship building ... Could anyone give me a reason why he/she thinks that Pipapav and MDL would not do well together or why would _____ shipyard and MDL do any better? ... what is the point of this so-called "transparency"?

I was reading a book recently which made some very interesting points which seem obvious once you read it ... one of them was:
More rules for transparency is an oxymoron ... more rules bring in more bureaucracy which actually hinders transparency and faster development ... E.g. in 1990s, one would have to run around offices for months to get a phone ... People would actually pay corrupt officials of use the by-channel of "agents" ... now you go to a shop and buy a sim card and a phone after filling a single form ... lesser rules -> higher transparency -> faster/cheaper service and the by-product is 0-corruption.

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 27 Sep 2011 16:42

rajrang wrote:
ARay wrote:http://www.inewsone.com/2011/09/01/indi ... hina/72800

Looks soth china sea is going hot. Any takers on that????
Augments the need for the 65,000 ton aircraft carrier (second planned in the Vikrant class). I would hope five of these would eventually (i.e. within 15 years) be built - one for the Bay of Bengal, one for the Arabian Sea, one for the S.E. Asia Sea based out of Port Blair, one for the Indian ocean (that can if need be back up the one in the S.E. Asia Sea or the Arabian Sea), one undergoing refit. I know I am dreaming.

Its not a dream but a far reaching goal that has to be achieved within a timeframe of 20-->25 yrs. But encountering china threat with CBG is a gross mistake as you may/must not release valuable asset like INS Vikramaditya at far sea immediately after raising the sole full grown CBG (within 2020 period). Instead of trying a near impossible goal like raising 5 CBGs in two decades (under Indian state of affairs) its better to modify to 3 full grown CBGs (within 2030) and invest rest of the resource/energy to raise small battle groups (BGs) centered on missile cruiser(barbwire!!!

) or latest destroyer and also to seek a port in Vietnam based on lend, lease and further to harbour half a squadron Mig 29K at the adjacent airfield. Immediatelly or even within next 15 yrs. there is no urgency in raising a CBG as Pakistan specific because current state of affairs with Pakistan as Possible Naval threat is very slim. Its good that after a long years INS has really looked forward to fasttrack the sub acquisition policy. Better late than never.

arun · Post by **arun** » 27 Sep 2011 20:53

X Posted from the Miscellaneous Pictures – Indian Military thread.

Picture dated August 12, 2011 of the Fincantieri built tanker Shakti (A-57) undergoing sea trials:

A-57 Shakti

And a whole bunch more here mixed in with some stray pictures of INS Deepak (A-50) and INS Jalashwa:

Naviearmatori

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 28 Sep 2011 10:21

Thanks Arun, these are good pictures. These ships are best of breed and can transfer solid stores at sea. Good value for money, unlike other purchases. Note the two EO balls on the superstructure http://www.naviearmatori.net/albums/use ... _283~0.jpg

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Sep 2011 11:47

arun wrote:X Posted from the Miscellaneous Pictures – Indian Military thread.

Picture dated August 12, 2011 of the Fincantieri built tanker Shakti (A-57) undergoing sea trials:

A-57 Shakti

Nice looking ship and a welcome addition , this ship looks more than a tanker to me , looking at the mast it has too many sensors , it probably has Command Platform function or at the least good intelligence gathering capability with the numbers of ESM mast and communication systems one sees on there.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Sep 2011 13:32

Some time ago I proposed that the IN pursue constructing an indigenous class of mini-subs which are sorely required in addition to the requirements for littoral and blue-water sub ops.The future req. for the so-called "stealth sub" is actually a misnomer,as ALL subs are supposed to be stealthy! In fact,the sub is the very first stealth weapon in modern times,we don't need to go back as far as Fulton!

Why smaller mini/midget subs? The large number of islands in out strategic island territories of the A&N islands,Lakshadweep and even based at our key bases,etc.,require quiet subs for ISR purposes.The Japanese in WW2 even took such subs all the way to Hawaii,(a somewhat similar op was carried out by the IN with our missile craft being towed to attack Karachi in '71)where for a variety of reasons,they failed to succeed.Rcent research indicates that oenm sub actually fired its "fish" at a US warship at Pearl Harbour during the attack,but was later sunk.

The most recent success of a mini/midget sub has been that of the alleged sinking of the SoKo Cheonan ASW corvette by a small NoKo sub.Now comes even more news that the SoKos have failed to detect the majority of NoKo sub intrusions,where these subs have supposedly carried small teams to infiltrate SoKo territory for intel purposes.Just a few days ago a small Colombian drug cartel's sub/subs was apprehended.Each can carry a cargo of 4-5t of drugs and also upto 5 crew members.Imagine a terrorist attack using such subs.It is a frightening thought especially as many of our N-reactors are by the sea.
The NoKos got their sub tech from elderly Russian Cold War designs,but as they have shown,even these subs based upon those old designs are extremely useful.

Here is the article on such subs:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/ ... 10927.aspx

Small Size Supplies Stunning Stealth
September 27, 2011: South Korean officials are alarmed after discovering that the navy has only been able to detect 30 percent of the North Korean subs they come across. Moreover, North Korea is using its submarines more frequently in training (for sneaking people into South Korea) exercises. North Korea has a fleet of over 80 mini-subs, plus about 24 older Russian type conventional boats (based on late-World War II German designs, as adapted for Russian service as the Whiskey and Romeo class). China helped North Korea set up its own submarine building operation, which included building some of the large Romeo class subs. North Korea got the idea for minisubs from Russia, which has had them for decades. North Korea has developed several mini-sub designs, most of them available to anyone with the cash to pay. The North Korean minisubs range in size from 76 to 300 tons displacement. Over a dozen of these small subs are equipped to fire torpedoes.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Sep 2011 13:42

would the EO balls be tied to barak-1 ?

what are the 8 petromax lamp type things hanging on the ribs of the main mast?

Bob V · Post by **Bob V** » 28 Sep 2011 15:26

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Sep 2011 23:44

Neela wrote:India to develop torpedo testing centre in Kyrgyzstan

AKA visited it in 2008. The offer was longstanding. India offered $4.5 million to rent the site in 2008. the Kyrgyz said no. Now deal is on. The MoD will send some guys soon - this was released in the press I think.

India's mil aid to Tajik Iwill detail in another thread.

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Sep 2011 06:58

Sea trials of Vikramaditya formerly Admiral Gorshkov postponed from November 2011 to May 2012. Not clear though if the earlier announced December 2012 date for handover to India has been impacted:

Sea trails of upgraded aircraft-carrier set for 2012

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 29 Sep 2011 09:48

P-8I Aircraft for Indian Navy Completes 1st Flight

Image under Boeing license to approved media

Boeing release

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Sep 2011 15:13

Vik.There is supposed to be an IN team at the yard overseeing the work from an earlier report,so oe does not imagine any further major delay.Early 2013 was supposed to be the commissioning timeframe.

Nice pic of the P-8I.From the tail,this bird will be stationed at Arkonam.Other LRMPs have DAB on them,for Dabolim,Goa.One presumes that half of the first batch will be stationed at each naval air station.AWST also said that Brahmos integration with Il-38s was being scrapped after some ground clearance problem and fitting it onto the TU-142s was on the "backburner".The kerosene fuelled hypersonic version will supposedly be smaller than the exg. missile.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 29 Sep 2011 15:51

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 29 Sep 2011 16:56

[quote="Philip"]
Why smaller mini/midget subs? The large number of islands in out strategic island territories of the A&N islands,Lakshadweep and even based at our key bases,etc.,require quiet subs for ISR purposes.The Japanese in WW2 even took such subs all the way to Hawaii,(a somewhat similar op was carried out by the IN with our missile craft being towed to attack Karachi in '71)where for a variety of reasons,they failed to succeed.Rcent research indicates that oenm sub actually fired its "fish" at a US warship at Pearl Harbour during the attack,but was later sunk.

This is one of the very interesting thread that you have spinned. The story of midget submarime in WWII is well known and also well known its devastating performance. However other than N-Korea, Iran is also operating suh small subs besides its kilo class sub fleet. Infact all countries who are/were influced by Russian Naval School of thought have one thing in common:

Development of a strong sub fleet in addition to its surface fleet.

This is actually very effective if the country X does not have enough resource/infrastructure/buyer option for Air Craft carrier to raise CBGs. Infact PLAN is gaining expertise in fielding a big sub fleet in sea. The NK vs. SK type conflicts will be seen more often nowadays with the waning of US umbrella. Though SK has adopted ADS long back but its not enough to prevent penetration of small subs in the coastal water.

The largest problem of fielding such mini sub fleet by INS will be lack of its replinishment facility at far sea. Its a need of hour to start developing small, diminutive battle groups and consequent rasing of smaller groups (even with tankers) to provide replinishment for such far sea endeavour. Only then the strategy of fielding mini subs in discrete islands will be successful.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 29 Sep 2011 18:05

Vice Admiral Anup Singh, CinC EC bids farewell to Kochi

Regret the goof up earlier. Damn Telangana stir. No coal, no electricity.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 29 Sep 2011 21:54

WRT the P-8I pic, What are the small fin shaped projections sticking out of the top of the fuselage? Antenna's of some kind?

Bob V · Post by **Bob V** » 30 Sep 2011 05:34

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 30 Sep 2011 06:08

nachiket wrote:WRT the P-8I pic, What are the small fin shaped projections sticking out of the top of the fuselage? Antenna's of some kind?

Yes.

However google for SATCOM for P-8s or p-8 poseidon antennas.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Sep 2011 12:38

AR,yes,Iran too plan to use their mini-subs in any crisis in the Gulf,were they can have a devastating effect on merchant shipping.the mini/midget subs require less intensive support than larger conventional subs and a small number of ships can be tasked to support them.In fact,some of the existing ships in service,like our OPVs can be fitted out for the task.

Now from the mini-sub to the mega-sub! Russia is to scrap its 3 remaining Typhoon class SSBNs,as operating them,6 milion pounds a year (can't we easily afford that?) is proving too expensive for the Russians,also because a new class of Borei subs dsigned to fire the Bulava missile and easier to operate are being built.However,the Typhoon is still an awesome leviathan of the deep and her 20 missile silos can each instead be used to carry at least 6-8 cruise missiles of Tomahawk size,just as smaller Ohio class USN SSBNs have been converted to carry such missiles (recently used in the Libyan War where 100+ were fried at targets).Even the much smaller Sierra class SSGN could carry 40 weapons.The IN sorely needs a large SSGN which could carry a devastating load of missiles and is such a survivable beast too!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... arine.html

Red October no more: Russia scraps Cold War-era Typhoon submarine
Russia is to definitively scrap its legendary typhoon class nuclear-powered submarine, the deadly Soviet-era vessel that inspired the Hollywood blockbuster The Hunt for Red October.

The legendary submarine appears to have become a victim of post Cold-War realities however. Three have already been scrapped to comply with nuclear disarmament commitments, and Russian navy chiefs now believe that the three remaining vessels are no longer needed either. The main reason is that a new smaller generation of nuclear submarine is in the process of being rolled out (the Borei) which is considered to have superseded the giant Soviet-era vessel.

The new subs are cheaper to run, require far fewer crew, and have been specially designed to carry Russia's new generation of Bulava sea-launched nuclear missiles. In contrast, two of the three older Typhoon-class subs need to undergo expensive conversion work before they can even fire the new missiles.

The old subs are also said to cost at least £6 million a year in running costs which is deemed too high.

Under the so-called new START nuclear arms reduction treaty that Russia and the United States signed last year, Moscow is only able to deploy a maximum of 1,550 nuclear warheads anyway. The three ageing Soviet-eras are capable of carrying 600 warheads between them and Russia is said to be keen to use other more modern launch vehicles to fill its quota (including silo-based ICBMs and strategic bombers

PS:One Russian analyst not too long ago suggested that Rusia offer India and the IN Typhoon class SSBNs and Backfire sueprsonic strategic bombers to counter the threat from the PLAN.AKA,why don't you take a "dekko" at the prospect when in Moscow?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 Sep 2011 15:04

Naval Depot at Kochi celebrates Diamond Jubilee

sum · Post by **sum** » 30 Sep 2011 15:24

PS:One Russian analyst not too long ago suggested that Rusia offer India and the IN Typhoon class SSBNs and Backfire sueprsonic strategic bombers to counter the threat from the PLAN.AKA,why don't you take a "dekko" at the prospect when in Moscow?

Sirji, let us first get hold of our Vik and Nerpa for which hard $$ were paid but which are stuck in perennial interior paint jobs..

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 30 Sep 2011 16:31

Philip wrote: Now from the mini-sub to the mega-sub! Russia is to scrap its 3 remaining Typhoon class SSBNs,as operating them,6 milion pounds a year (can't we easily afford that?) is proving too expensive for the Russians,also because a new class of Borei subs dsigned to fire the Bulava missile and easier to operate are being built.However,the Typhoon is still an awesome leviathan of the deep and her 20 missile silos can each instead be used to carry at least 6-8 cruise missiles of Tomahawk size,just as smaller Ohio class USN SSBNs have been converted to carry such missiles (recently used in the Libyan War where 100+ were fried at targets).Even the much smaller Sierra class SSGN could carry 40 weapons.The IN sorely needs a large SSGN which could carry a devastating load of missiles and is such a survivable beast too!

PS:One Russian analyst not too long ago suggested that Rusia offer India and the IN Typhoon class SSBNs and Backfire sueprsonic strategic bombers to counter the threat from the PLAN.AKA,why don't you take a "dekko" at the prospect when in Moscow?

Good to read your in depth study. As it appears (mostly from sources of wikipedia) the Typhoon (to be scrapped) and Nerpa (to be leased to INS) are derivatives of same project or project bearing the same name.

Typhoon is The Project 941 or Akula, Russian "Акула" ("Shark") class submarine (NATO reporting name: Typhoon) is a type of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine deployed by the Soviet Navy in the 1980s. With a submerged displacement of 48,000 tons,[1]

Nerpa is Project 971 Щука-Б (Shchuka-B, 'Shchuka' meaning pike, NATO reporting name "Akula"), is a nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) first deployed by the Soviet Navy in 1986. with an average displacement ~ 10000 tons.

Once again Typhoon is 5 times more in terms of displacement compared to Nerpa and I doubt if such facility exist to harbour the mammoth anywhere in Indian coastal line. Planwise it is very much o.k. to counter PLAN but once again question is infrastructure. Secondly now 300 some INS persons are being trained on board. This is just a nascent stage before blooming into a full fledged nuke sub arm.

I personally feel that AIP capable Disel-Electric attack subs (Scorpene) at the moment and (Amur!!) may be in future headed by three nuke subs of Akula-I class is good for another couple of decaded. Ofcourse the plan for using backfire bombers as a back up will be very useful. But once again even to implement this from Bay of Bengal-->south china sea we need to really have at least 2-->3 good replinishment facility outside India (Singapore, Vietnam at best). Acquring Typhoon sounds damn good but I really doubt it may suffer a same fate as our aircraft carriers. I mean I do not doubt about acquisition of Nerpa in time but Vikramaditys----- only time will tell.

Once again kudos for your mini-sub link, a very very interesting twist indeed and deserves second thought.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 30 Sep 2011 17:01

Indian Navy's Poseidon Takes Off
Business Standard

P-8I Poseidon

John · Post by **John** » 30 Sep 2011 17:15

Philip wrote:PS:One Russian analyst not too long ago suggested that Rusia offer India and the IN Typhoon class SSBNs and Backfire sueprsonic strategic bombers to counter the threat from the PLAN.AKA,why don't you take a "dekko" at the prospect when in Moscow?

And how exactly are we going to maintain Typhoon our docks can't exactly handle submarine that size. As for Backfire IMO they are not worth the trouble they are cold war relics that are too expensive to maintain and plus it will come with string attached like russia not allowing us to retrofit any non Russian stand off missile.

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 30 Sep 2011 17:42

About Typhoon I am really doubtful. But about Backfire I am not because
____________________________________________________________________________________
Chinese Bombers

The Russian offer has already drawn a swift reaction from leading Western defense analysts.

"Russia now has two regiments of Tu-22M3s available for sale, and a model of the Backfire was displayed for the first time at the November 2004 Air show China," stated Richard Fisher.

"A potential Chinese purchase of the Backfire raises three issues: First, the PLA [People's Liberation Army] would be responding in a forceful way to new U.S. deployments at Guam so as to increase the cost of this investment to Washington," noted Fisher.

"Second, such a purchase would indicate a long-term PLA commitment to long-range strategic aviation, raising the prospect of future Chinese-designed stealth bombers," said Fisher.

"Finally, such a purchase would serve to exploit current U.S. plans to cut back on planned purchases of F/A-22 fighters – the only U.S. airborne platform now available that could assure U.S. air superiority," concluded Fisher.

source: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/art ... 1838.shtml
___________________________________________________________________________________

Whats going on between INS and PLAN is nothing but a sort of rerun of cold war (within the limits of each navy). Discarding Tu bombers as vintages is no good. Infact there is news also that China may add mid-air refuelling to TU-22M so that US west coast will come under its range.

USSR equipments had a problem of adpatibilty to weapons of other origin (still it exists but in a reduced scale). But it does not matter if we could further modify the bombers also I do not have any reservation against Russian missiles.