Bharat Rakshak

May be they could put it up at the place where Rezistor-K is there and built another tower for it , they gave premium place for Rezistor , its just that phenomenal capability of Podberezovik is being under utilised , what bad of radar is Podberezovik ? IEEE L band ?

Philip Hammond defends aircraft carrier U-turn

Defence secretary says PM's judgment on jets was right, despite decision to reverse it because of its £5bn cost


Defence secretary Philip Hammond confirms in a Commons statement that the Ministry of Defence will abandon plans to buy its preferred fighter Link to this video

Philip Hammond insisted he would "not blindly pursue" a key defence programme personally endorsed by the prime minister as he announced a U-turn over the type of fighters needed for the military's two new aircraft carriers.

The defence secretary said the delays and costs of putting the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) wanted by Downing Street on the carriers were now too great, and the Ministry of Defence had accepted "our approach must change".

Putting a brave face on the decision, MoD officials admitted it was easy to be clever with hindsight, but rejected suggestions the about-face had been caused by the rush to complete the 2010 strategic defence and security review (SDSR).

In the review, David Cameron demanded the military buy the F35-C version of the JSF, which needs "cats and traps" to launch it from deck. He then mocked Labour for buying the less capable F35-B, which takes off like a harrier jump jet.

But the MoD has pirouetted again, with Hammond telling MPs the costs of converting the carriers to take "cats and traps" had risen so much, and the delays to the F35-C had become so great, it was right to revert back.

Defence officials said the MoD had already spent £40m-£50m to convert one of the carriers. They predicted the total cost of putting "cats and traps" on both of the new ships would total £5bn – 10 times the amount estimated in 2005.

However, a source denied Cameron's decision could be described as a mistake. "Hindsight is an easy thing. We can all make judgments about what happened last week. We know more now than we knew then. The judgment [in 2010] was a reasonable one. It is easy from this position to say we would have made a different choice."

The source said further analysis of costs in recent months had shown "unexpected" problems.

In his statement to the Commons, Hammond also tried to deflect criticism from Downing Street. "The 2010 SDSR decision on carriers was right at the time, but the facts have changed."

The carrier programme has been dogged by delays and technical problems that were compounded by the decision to buy the F35-C. Though it is a better all-round fighter than its sister aircraft, putting "cats and traps" on the ships pushed up costs so much the MoD was told it would have to mothball the first of the carriers, the Queen Elizabeth, as soon as it was built.

By reverting back to the jump jet version of the JSF, which is much closer to production, the Queen Elizabeth should now be ready for operations, equipped with 12 fighters, by 2018.

The decision also means the RAF will fly the "B" version of the JSF, with each aircraft, being built by the US firm Lockheed Martin, now thought to cost between £50m and £100m.

The U-turn was supported by the heads of the three services and the chief of the defence staff, General Sir David Richards, as well as Hammond, the defence source said.

The defence secretary asked Downing Street to endorse the move in March, but was rebuffed.

During sharp exchanges at Westminster, the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, accused the government of wasting two years, and claimed the government's approach was "as incoherent as it is ludicrous".

Murphy called on the prime minister to apologise for his incompetence, and questioned why the government had been in such a rush to scrap the UK's only aircraft carrier, Ark Royal, before a replacement was available.

"Standing at the dispatch box, the prime minister announced his plans to reverse Labour's carrier strike policy, scrap the Harrier, sell Ark Royal, build two carriers but mothball one, sack trainee pilots and downgrade British power at sea.

"But this U-turn has now gone full circle and nothing has been gained. Two years wasted."

The former Labour defence secretary Bob Ainsworth told MPs the government had taken the right decision. The U-turn had brought "some sanity" to the carrier programme, he said. "But I can't go along with the excuse … that the facts have changed," he said.

"The fundamental facts were there at the time and have not changed. We have been in an extremely expensive cul-de-sac for the last 18 months as a result of a shambles of an SDSR."

Hammond said he was "not interested in trading insults about what happened in the past".

Then Hire the Pakis to keep Britiz law and order.

Andy B, a good Navy always tries to achieve Sea Control, that allows usage of the sea for any purpose militarily or economically for the benefit of the nation. For example, drilling for oil offshore of Vietnam. For sea control, one needs reach and presence. In simple terms, going there and staying there. Staying power is defined as endurance and ability to fight it out across a broad spectrum of threats.

On the Eastern seas, the Arihant and Chakra submarines along with VLS equipped Ranvir/Ranvijay and Prithvi equipped OPVs will project power afar. The Shivaliks will provide multi-functional capabilities like ASW and Fleet AD. The Kukhri/Kora will defend our Island territories and scout for the main fleet.

On the Western seas, the OPVs will protect SLOC. The Sindhu's/Talwar's and their land attack Klubs will enable power projection over land. The Vikramaditya will provide mobile protection to the fleet. The Godavaris/Brahmaputras/T209s will provide significant ASW capabilities. The Delhi's will provide fleet air defence. Missile boats will scout and attack whenever needed.

Amphibious capabilities exist on both coasts. Logistics are doubled with 4 tankers in service.

Philip, Best option for UK is to become three Island provinces of India with the Queen as the heriditary Governor. Art 370 can be extended to them if they want.

Ramana , I've always maintained that one day Britain will become "the jewel in India's crown"! Mittal,Tata and Cobra beer are the first steps in this direction.Once that happens,there will be no need to return the Koh-I-Noor!

the Pakis to keep Britiz law and order.

SNAIK, many thanx for data on the Big Vik. Would you know what the full load displacement is ? I reckon its 45000+ tons.

Thanks

Is Varunastra a torpedo, or a torpedo control system, or something else, like a ROV underwater. The description in the BR homepage article( news section) does not make it clear.

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/3664/img2456j.jpg
varunastra pic

SNAIK, many thanx for data on the Big Vik. Would you know what the full load displacement is ? I reckon its 45000+ tons.

Thanks

C band
http://www.smp-salyut.ru/images/list/podber1.pdf

Rarely find radars using C band these days , mostly all long range radars are L band , C band are mostly used for satellites etc any advantage of C band radar ?

Thanks Pragnya. But what is confusing are the following two lines. Why did the report have to confuse lay readers - up until then, they were doing fine, and the article made sense.

"Varunastra detects enemy object and informs the control room. It is a clever underwater spy"

"Varunastra carries the Takshak."

So the question remains, is Varunastra an underwater surveillance vehicle, a torpedo carrier/launcher, or an actual torpedo?

Well if you look at the specs, it is a bit of an early warning radar.

SNaik can you explain what you mean by early warning radar , all LR Radar on ships are early warning type , it is mostly the choice of band they use is bit intriguing , NATO LR radars on ships have L band but Russia uses C band.... there must be some pro and cons of such using each band. The C band they are mentioning are the IEEE standards i think.

No, it's the NATO designations they use. C band means 0.5 to 1.0 GHz, that's even longer wave than IEEE L band. And the Russians consider that longer waves are better for detection of stealth aircraft.

This one is better:
SHIVALIK: India's New Generation Warship
By Vice Adm Rajeshwer Nath
Issue: Vol 25.2 Apr-Jun 2010 | Date: 07 March, 2012

Hmm interesting. It is to the Navy's credit that a Naval Architect and a purely technical person from the constructor branch rises to to a Vice Admiral. Pretty good for a person from a non combatant arm. The last I heard of him in the early 90s, he was a Rear Admiral and I thought that is as far as a non com goes.Looks like he rose further and then retired.

The day, the Air Force and Army get equivalent Aerospace Enggs and Mech Enggs into their force and give them clear career paths that let them rise to levels of seniority, will be when those services can redeem themselves from the rut they are stuck in wrt modernization and weapons development

Hypersonic missiles are within the design envelopes of several modern air defense systems that have been designed to defend against tactical ballistic missiles with hypersonic terminal velocities. For the hypothetical defensive system considered above, and for a radar cross section of greater than 0.1 square meter, there is relatively little difference in the lethal range for hypersonic missile speeds between Mach 6.5 and Mach 8. However, the vulnerability of a hypersonic missile to surface-to-air missiles can be reduced through combined reductions in radar cross section and in-flight maneuvering, and, to some extent, an increase in speed. The lethality of command-guided, surface-to-air missiles is markedly reduced for targets with a radar cross section less than 0.1 square meter. Overall, the most important factor in hypersonic missile survivability is the size of radar cross section.

..
Since then, the navy has inducted the first of its newly-designed Teg-class guided missile ships, INS Teg, from Russia (Apr 27) while plans are being firmed up for building four amphibious transport dock ships like the INS Jalashwa, as well as six new conventional submarines with air independent propulsion (AIP) and cruise missile capability.
..
Overall, the navy has planned to acquire some 500 aircraft, about 100 of them combat jets, and the remaining for transport and surveillance roles. Helicopters form a major chunk of the proposed acquisitions.

Sources told India Strategic that the 45 MiG-29Ks that the Navy has already ordered from Russia will only be used on board INS Vikramaditya and India's first indigenous aircraft carrier now under construction. Both these will have ski jumps and arrested wire recovery (STOBAR or Short Take Off but Arrested Recovery).

Notably, the Russians have already modified the arrester wires on INS Vikramaditya to accommodate the naval variant of India's indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the naval prototype (NP-1) which was test flown on April 27.

India is working on two more aircraft carriers, possibly of over 60,000 tonnes, and it will take some time to select the combat jet combination for them. Those two carriers should use slingshot propulsion by steam turbines rather than ski jumps, and of course, the standard three arrestor wires.

That technology will possibly have to come from the US carriers, where slingshot takeoffs are routine. Naval teams area already in touch with manufacturers as part of the learning process, after which RfPs should appropriately be issued.

French company DCNS is already involved in making six Scorpene submarines at the Mazagon Dock in Mumbai, with a proposal to upgrade the last two of them with AIP capability, which can extend the operational submergence of a submarine from about three days to seven or so.

As for the nuclear submarines, which can stay underwater for three months, the Indian Navy is working on two or three more Arihant-class submarines, but they should progressively be equipped with more powerful nuclear reactors and weapons than INS Arihant, whose systems are now being fine-tuned.
...

I have been wondering - can the Shaurya be used on destroyers? I would think that this is definitely possible - it's dimensions are v.similar to that of the Granit and slightly more than the Brahmos, although it weighs 2X the Bmos. What would be the advantages?