Bharat Rakshak

The total cost of revised deal for Gorshkov is $2.33 Billion for the Aircraft Carrier and 16 Mig-29K and additional $1.6 Billion 29 additional Mig-29K.

So final cost is $3.93 billion for 45 Mig-29K plus Aircraft Carrier ......say ~ $ 4 billion.

so in purely monetary terms there would not be much diff between a new ADS from italy and the AG+16mig29K....around $500mil dollars. thats less than the cost IN will have to spend per ship on the P17A. add to that a service life longer by 20 years for a brand new ship and 100% common parts with the Kochi ADS.

Well you cant be too sure what exactly will be the cost involved in building a 45 thousand T ship in Italian or some other yards unless you have some thing concrete to compare.

May be 10 years back when Gorshkov was signed it made sense , may be now it wont. Any ways IN is a logistics nightmare and Gorshkov is one bad decision to the many they have made.

Austin/Singha Guru,

While we may continue to debate cost benefit analysis of ADS (Gorky or Italian), it is important to note that whether the second option was available at the time this contract was signed.

We have had an article in Telegraph, today showing how US and its puddle were after India following 1998 Nuke tests. But for the intervention of our TRUE STRATEGIC PARTNERS - RUSSIA AND FRANCE, probably they would have convinced UN SC to sanction India on lines with IRAN/IRAQ. We need to understand whether in such scenario, Italy would have agreed to build ADS for us, when US/UK had already sanctioned us by way of holding spares, confiscating (i dont know any harder word) our built prototypes/ FBW codes, needs to be examined. The only country that comes to mind in Western part of world is France that could have supplied ADS but we know French stuff comes at huge price and our economy was not blooming at it is now to purchase expensive equipment. Remember, some stories which said we went for Su30 MKI instead of Mirage 2000 it they were found cheaper. However, I agree, ITALY has provided consultancy for ADS, but building carrier is different ball game. Also, there are other reasons as below.

Secondly, the analysis cannot be done in isolation of NERPA which was a part of the Gorky deal. Such arrangement was not possible with Italy or any western nation then except probably France which again could not excericed for reasons decribed above.

Thirdly, the economic scenario of the country was not great at that point of time with nation witnessing first major slow down after economy opened by MMS. American sanctions only worsened the things. At that point of time, had our Finance ministry approved an expensive deal with Italy (expensive in relative to Gorky deal - which originally as contracted was very cheap) also needs to be looked into.

All in all, I feel GOI/IN did what it should have done at that point of time. The Russians screwed us (if that is proper word) once our ecomony started shining and we started purchasing expensive equipment from elsewhere (C 130/ Phalcons etc). They found India was not longer poor nation and time to reap benefits of relationships where they supplied crucial hardware at throw away prices.

Yes, that does sound good - I will concede that much. Problem is, like Austin said, we don't know how much more an Italian built Cavourish ADS would have cost. The ADS is much bigger than the Cavour, and has the ski ramp to boot. Another thing, did the Vikad deal not include $$ss for the refurb of current Chakra - perhaps there was a strategic value in it that made it worth more?

ONe thing that I would've certainly liked to see with the IN would've been the a Su-30MKI based carrier a/c instead of the less capable MiG-29K, and this would have been possible with a start from scratch carrier instead of the Vikad, whose design restricted the possibility of a/c being employed to smaller birds such as the Rafale/MiG-29K

I think there is enough scope for IN to have upto 6 squadrons of AD fighters for its three carriers.

2 Mig-29K
2 LCA-Mk-2
2 Rafale M

Small propellers spinning fast make more noise (due to more cavitation I think) than large propellers running slower to produce the same amount of thrust.

It's not about how much scope there is, it's what you need.. Naval Tejas and Mig29 (K?) are allready two types. That means munition and spare part for 2 types. that means logistics, that means storage that means technicians. Hugely expensive.
The naval Tejas and Mig29K are different fighters so it makes sense to have them both. They so a different job. Tejas for example intercept and attack at close range. Mig29K for long range attack intercept airdominance.
I think these 2 types are enough. How many fighters/bombers are stations on the USN carriers

True,

But India will have 3 carriers and they will need about 6 quadrons to support those three squadrons. I don't see us buying any more mig-29Ks.

It perhaps should be NLCA and Rafale moving forward for the third carrier.

Philip, Italy has more experience building large carrier and carrier types than Sevmash. They could have build ADS-0 as I mentioned earlier. ADS-1 is a super sized and MKIzed Cavour. I am sure they would have built it faster than India and far faster than this Gorky fiasco.

As for the carrier wing, we could have still gone with the Mig-29Ks.

No, IMHO Nerpa was a separate deal. I dont see why money for Nerpa needs to be routed through Vikad when everyone knows (and it has been publicized) that India is leasing Nerpa. So the deal was never hidden.

Cavour also has a ski ramp but different config. ADS is much bigger but it is derived from the Cavour design with Italian help. The Australian Canberra class are also derived from Cavour; so it stands to reason the Italians could build ADS in a reasonable period of time.

Aircraft carrier on course


Please go the link and read the full topic

Defence Minister visits Naval Base
The Hindu

DELETED

Sindhurakshak being upgraded with Club and USHUS, photos 13 to 20:
http://fotografersha.livejournal.com/210408.html

There is a picture in Hindu of the IN ship firing a Brahmos.

Except that Navy chiefs have been on record saying that if some one can get them a ship in this time frame and this budget they have their cheque books open.

There is a tremendous difference between having a Italian shipbuilder help a Indian "Military" yard in building large ships and actually build one in their own yards at the same cost and same timelines.

"If this and then this" is a valid exercise, but the one here clearly is missing out some factors.

Talking about Shivalik class.. I don't see many pictures of it...
How come? It's not top secret is it?

It's relatively new to the IN fleet. But if you Google for images, you will see plenty of pictures for Shivalik from many different angles.

Google Image Search for INS Shivalik

If Nerpa was a separate deal how comes it was not signed as such? IIRC, it was said that the Nerpa was signed for along with the Gorky in a "package deal". And God knows best.

.

Multiple sources via Google chacha.

Russia is to drop production of the Lada/Amur diesel subs.The report (http://en.ria.ru/russia/20120209/171225725.html) suggests that the new AIP system under development which will arrive in 2014 will be retrofitted to the earlier subs built and any new ones in the future.



This probably indicates that a non-AIP diesel sub today has little attraction in the market abroad,esp. as almost all new subs being bought are of the AIP type.There were reports about Russia also trying to develop new high powered batteries which would obviate the need for an AIP system ,giving the sub almost double extended underwater endurance on the new batteries alone.

The dropping of manufacture of the Lada/Amur in current form,indicates that it would not have been found suitable for the IN's second line of subs for which initial work is on to find a suitable sub for local production. One has to see what type of sub the Russians will now offer the IN in the contest.

India moves navy as axed Maldives president Nasheed faces prison



Another link

we have no option to save face but crack the stick and put people in line.

we were totally blindsided by the coup itself.

else be prepared for a sea based pakistan on our west coast.

nip the problem now.

The ends dont justify the means. The Maldivian people have the right to choose for themselves.

From what I understand, from a broader perspective, the civil revolt brought back leaders favourable to India and the international community.

Our intervention in 1987 was an exception and not the rule. And the PLOTE mercenaries were India trained, so essentially we were cleaning our shit before it gave us a bad name.

^^ On pooch while reading "Ghost Wars". The author mentions that USN subs were virtually parked near TSP waters since 98-00 trying to fire off missiles if OBL was located in Afg.

Does it mean that there were frequent encounters of USN with IN assets prowling that area since i cant see them not bumping into each other when operating in such close quarters for such long periods?

Sum, Anther aspect of Operation Parakram was 2 US CBG's were based of the coast of Pakistan. In case of a shooting war in India -Pak, US would have had to stop its war in Afganistan. That was added pressure on us in the beginning of 2002.

Most certainly US did not want GOI to open another front with Pakistan as that would mean PA pulling it troop and divirting towards india , neither did GOI had any stomach to do that.

Having said that most analyst still are not clear what Op Parakram has achieved by keeping troops at border for 6 months and then withdrawing it without any benefit.

Enough Paki casualties for them to abandon artillery exchanges across the LOC began by them since 1989.

But that was not the idea, after the parliament attack the Army was mobilized. Now if we start stating well we mobilized but since we did not go to war, it is a defeat is a self goal.

No one knows why the Army was mobilised and no one knows why it was withdrawn.....some analyst believe the govt did that in haste and then ate crow by withdrawing it

What happened was the log period of mobilisation impacted their training and other professional activity.....but there were also lessons learnt for the Army and the whole idea of quick mobilisation or Cold Start or what ever is the newer name given had its genesis there .....

I hope you read the full interview which was in Russian if not i will post it here.

What the Navy Chief said that the current Lada in trial lacked the power at the desired level what they had specified and it wont make it to production model... what he wants is there are two more lada which is being built and he wants that to have AIP propulsion and does not want a simple diesel electric propulsion which he said was in use since WW2.

So the Lada design is not being dropped but is being enhanced with AIP propulsion which was not in favour earlier by RuN , now the caveat is they should be able to solve all problems with AIP and Propulsion.

For the IN i think its in a way good becuase AIP will be adopted by RuN and it wont be the sole user of it i.e. if they decide to choose the Amur design.

Frankly speaking i am not a great believer in having two seperate SSK design and just add more logistics problem , its better to build Enhanced Scorpene or a Spanish S-80 design which has most logistics commonality with Scorpene design.

This whole East and West concept will bleed the navy in long run.

Army was mobilized after a series of Paki terror attacks in 1999-01 culminating in the Parliament attack in Dec 2001 giving a feeling Pakistan had gone too far and war needs to be declared.

In view of pressure from Western Powers and internal security apparatus in the country in taters post Godhra and the Gujarat riots, it became clear war was not an option and hence Army had to be demobilized.

Mistakes, your policy should not be reactionary, you do not mobilize and claim to the whole world you are mobilizing.

What is eating crow, did Pakistan defeat India - NO. All that happened was India did not attack- this is being spun as a Paki victory??

As it looks like Amur will never enter IN service. A Super Scorpene with VL Nirbhay type CM and MESMA/DRDO AIP will be a better and low risk alternative. VL Nirbhay will provide longer distance strike capability than VL Brahmos. Though Brahmos has its own +ve but it will require a bigger sub, more engineering challenges and risk and it will make the project more expensive.

Eating Crow is you mobilise the whole army without purpose and then withdraw it without gaining any thing.

Paki victory......hell Pakis do not need anyarmy victory ....it has been sucessfully bleeding India since past 2 decades with Terrorism.

Austin, Yes , but the role of Western powers in supporting Munna was brought out. Also, next time we learnt that we don't need to make a song and dance at the time of mobilisation but do it quietly.

Tx Austin for the clarifications.I think that is what I understood also.Non-AIP Ladas not able to meet new requirements/capabilities.

Reg. second line of subs.There will be no harm in having a scond line of subs from Russia or Germany,as we already operate two-earlier three types,when the Foxtrots were also around.Logistics should not be a problem.The Scorpenes are too small and will require first Russia's permission and then extensive redeisgn to accomodate Brahmos.Building a few extra Scorpenes to have a large number of them in service should suffice,unless German U-boats are found to be superior in evaluations.They are best for the littorals while a larger sub that has two sizes of tubes and silos for BMos, is required for bue-water oips with greater endurance and weaponry.Nirbhay will take some time to develop and is meant more for LR land attack-could even carry a N-warhead like Israeli LR cruise missiles said to be aboard their Dolphin subs, rather than BMos ,meant for anti-ship ops.