Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 23 Apr 2014 21:06

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5428 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 ... 136  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 07:39 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44
Posts: 138
@ Guru_Tat

The latest edition of SP's naval forces has a pretty good rationale for OPVs on page 10

http://www.spsnavalforces.net/ebook.asp?Id=121205064544-9d50263c86c7464386929859071ec5a0&Name=sp_s_naval_forces_dec_2012_-_jan_2013&Info=SP's%20Naval%20Forces%20Dec%202012%20-%20Jan%202013&t=1354698624810&r=56&year=2012

@ RamaY

That was an older Sukanya class vessel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 08:23 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 964
^ Just a warning I would stay away from clicking those links, got ton of virus alerts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 18:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31
Posts: 944
Nuke sub Chakra facing problems with critical components: Navy

NEW DELHI: India's only Russian-origin nuclear submarineINS Chakra is facing problems with its critical components affecting its operational readiness.

The 8,000-tonne submarine has been facing problems with its critical components and Russia has been asked to provide the parts for the vessel which need to be replaced, Navy sources told here.

However, they did not divulge the components which would have to be replaced but indicated they are critical for the operations of the submarine.

India had inducted the Akula-II Class 'Nerpa' nuclear submarine in its inventory in April this year at the Vishakhapatnam-based Eastern Naval Command. It was renamed 'Chakra' by the Indian Navy.

The Russian submarine had met with an accident in November 2008 when it was undergoing sea trials in the Sea of Japan in which around twenty sailors were killed and several others were left injured.

The submarine was launched in 1993-94 but its construction was held up since then due to lack of funds with the Russian Navy.

However, in 2004, the Russian side decided to build it after reaching a ten-year lease agreement for operation of the submarine with the Indian side.

With INS Chakra and the yet-to-be-inducted indigenously built INS Arihant, India is planning to have two nuclear submarines guarding its vast maritime boundary.

With a maximum speed of 30 knots, Chakra can go to a depth of 600 metres and has an endurance of 100 days with a crew of 73. However, as per the lease accord, it cannot carry nuclear warheads.

The vessel is armed with four 533mm and four 650mm torpedo tubes.

India had leased and operated a Charlie-class Russian nuclear submarine, also called 'Chakra', in 1988 for training its personnel on such submarines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 20:59 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 03 May 2012 01:18
Posts: 34
@Titash

The release from the Office of the Navy Chief reads "monitoring sea lines of communication, defence of offshore oil installations and other critical offshore national assets, the release said." as the Saryu class ships primary responsibilities.

Do you really need radar signature reduction, 25+ knot top speed, 2200 ton displacement and a 6000-8000nm range in a ship to fulfill the above objectives when all you are using for protection is a 76mm gun?

The point of my earlier post was very simple. If you are making a substantial investment in a 2200 ton 105M long ship fast ship with stealth features and a 125+ crew, why not arm it suitably? Put a LR-SAM battery on it or a 2X2 533mm torpedoes or a quadruple Kh-35 Uran launcher on it along with related sensors for an incremental cost and give it some teeth.

Globally ships of this size carry substantially more offensive equipment, we need to find our own sweet spot in terms of arming them and cost, not e-masculating them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 21:13 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 1022
Location: Land of the free
For one, none of these weapons come by themselves. They will need heavy and costly sensors and trained personnel to operate them. That's like making it into a small corvette.
Also, it may be offensive to deploy a ship with that capability in some situations.

Since it can have a chopper, it can be armed with suitable offensive weapons too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 21:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Posts: 1100
Location: mumbai
Guru_Tat wrote:
substantial investment in a 2200 ton 105M long ship
You missed the earlier discussion on this. Sensors & Weapons are more expensive than Machinery & Hull. To add the former, one may end up spending twice the cost of the latter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 00:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Posts: 1683
Tsarkarji, what are various sensors required to equip such a boat with the minimum asuw capability? I am talking about rbu6000 and lwt torpedo system?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 02:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44
Posts: 138
@ Guru_Tat

As tsarkar said, the sensors & weapons are the most expensive part of a ship. The size, speed, endurance, and helicopter capability are the required minimum investments to prosecute somali pirates and perform SAR. Adding sensors, SSM, SAM would quadruple the cost.

I was originally questioning the need for Stealth Features + 76mm + AK-630 whereas a Sukanya design might have worked just as well. I am now coming around to the thought process that it may simply mean that putting a 76mm + AK-630 provides an added margin of survivability for practically no cost (after all, guns are the cheapest naval weapons; I also assume a cheap EO ball is incorporated). Ditto for the Stealth Features, may have an initial design expense but not increased manufacturing costs versus the Sukanyas

In case additional platforms are needed and the Saryu needs to operate in a true naval role, then its embarked helicopter (and it should really be capable of embarking a SeaKing) will provide the ASW or AShW punch to a task force/concoy escort


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 04:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 1621
I think 6000 NM range is actually denoting the endurance of the ship. It'll not operate more than a few hundred nautical miles away from the shores. Although It could cover several thousand square miles during each patrol trip. It could also provide months long 'at the station" endurance.

It is not a warship!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 07:57 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
its more suited than Sukanya class to first cross the indian ocean and then do coastal and island patrolling. even if its role therein is not high threat, you still need a big, fast and stable ship to reach that far and maintain time on station.

far better than devoting a P28 or bigger to that role.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 13:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14
Posts: 2406
Nuke sub Chakra is facing spares problems because the Indian submariners do not know how to use them :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2012 18:43 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28
Posts: 1178
Wokay.

GSL has released a picture of the INS Saryu.

http://www.goashipyard.co.in/control/fi ... U.jpg.jpeg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 00:37 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 14 Jun 1999 11:31
Posts: 306
Hi Aditya G,
Even tough your question is addressed at Tsarkar, I couldn't resist the opportunity to try to pull some info together (thanks to uncle google!). What you have below is an estimate (since not all prices are available) of what would be needed to give the NOPVs ASW capability that you ask for.

Senors:
HUMSA-NG: approximately 30-90 crore, depending on size of array (figures calculated based on BEL info circa 2008)
NAGAN towed array: (no figure available), let's take the lower end from above so that cost is 30 crore.


Weapons and associated controls:
Based on SRGM cost circa 2011 from BHEL (47 crore), one set each of RBU-6,000 plus 2 x Triple ILAS system would likely coast between 40-50 crore each.
ASW Decoy system Meerch is 6 crore for a set of two.

So if we stay with the lower end of costs this at a minimum will be around:
30 crore + 30 crore+ 40 crore + 40 crore + 6 crore + fitting out costs/integration/redundency/overead (say 30% or 42-45 crore) = Rs 190 crore

IIRC these ships were originally ordered for about 600 crore each, so adding on ASW capability would add at a minimum some 30% more to their costs.

I would welcome any additions and corrections.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 04:31 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 03 May 2012 01:18
Posts: 34
^^^Wiki lists the Steregushchy class corvette (2200 tons displacement) costing $120-$150 M/ship with a armament and sensor suite below-

Sensors and
processing systems:
Air search radar: Furke-E 3D, E/F band
Surface search radar: Granit Central Scientific Institute Garpun-B/3Ts-25E/PLANK SHAVE radar
Monument targeting radar
Fire control radar: Ratep 5P-10E Puma for A-190
HOT FLASH radar
Sonar: Zarya-ME suite, bow mounted. Vinyetka low frequency active/passive towed array
Navigation: GORIZONT-25 integrated navigation system
Electronic warfare
& decoys: TK-25E-5 ECM, 4 x PK-10 decoy
Armament:
1 x Arsenal A-190 100mm
2 x MTPU pedestal machine gun 14.5 mm
1 x Kashtan CIWS-M CADS or
12x Redut VLS cells
2 x AK-630М CIWS
1x8 VL Kh-35 missiles
2x4 330mm torpedo tubes (for Paket-NK)
Aircraft carried: Hangar for Ka-27 Helicopter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steregushc ... s_corvette

Granted that wiki data tends to be not very accurate, but we are already spending $100MM/Saryu.
Wouldn't spending $50-60MM extra/boat and making it more lethal make sense?

On second thoughts, would exchanging balance sheets in times of war ensure us victory? You know, we throw our balance sheet and they throw us theirs. Whoever has the better one, wins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 05:01 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Posts: 441
Location: Riga
Russian Wiki gives price for 20380 at 10 bln RUR which is around 300 million USD. I'd rather go with that estimate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 06:11 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 964
Sounds about right, Even P-28s will likely cost around 350 million each i wouldn't be surprised if Project 20385 costs little bit more than that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 11:39 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
what VL system does the KH35 use in the RUS corvette? is it the same sold for VL shtil on the 054 ships and then being trialed in other cheen ships?

not that VL is any use on small ships, things are best left in inclined tubes to preserve interior space.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 12:15 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 10215
Singha wrote:
what VL system does the KH35 use in the RUS corvette?


Mounted amidship in inclined launcher


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 13:32 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23
Posts: 254
suryag wrote:
Nuke sub Chakra is facing spares problems because the Indian submariners do not know how to use them :D

may you enlight us, with indepths of your comment/clain....?
:)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 17:32 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14
Posts: 2406
^^^Ask philip ji for explanation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 18:08 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28
Posts: 289
What is being suggested vis-e-vis the Saryu Class OPV's could be up-armed by pouring in a bit more of money, is a classic case of requirement/mission creep. People tend to think that adding a bit more would a great panacea for everything. But the catch is the requirement/mission needs never ends.

For ex. by adding 30% more cost we get a ASW armed vessel. Great. But then someone might say why not add 20% more and fit in a bunch of AShM too. Boy then we would get a great multi-role vessel. Wah kya baat hai. But then, hey presto, why not add 400-500 tons more in size, fit in a bunch of Barak-1, throw in a few dollars more, you get a formidable ship, a light frigate. :-)...Send it to south china sea and see PLAN shitting in its pant. See it never ends.

One needs to understand what is the role that is being envisaged here for these OPV's. Basically a ship which can patrol not only our shoreline, but go across the Arabian sea and patrol the pirate infested sea's there for long periods, cheaply. Go across the Bay of Bengal into the Andaman Sea and patrol there. Basically where ever the need be in the entire Indian Ocean Rim, we can send it there and it can stay for prolong period. Hence the huge range of the vessel and it large endurance. Which basically results in size, for carrying the fuel & provisions needed. Also remember, these very sea's & oceans and very rough during the monsoon and cyclone season. The larger size helps there too. Day to day patrolling may not be as glamorous as going all guns blazing in war, but remember, these mundane work actually helps maintain peace & security.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Dec 2012 18:20 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19
Posts: 3117
Location: छिछला पानी में (In shallow waters)
Plus ships like these cuts sailing time requirements of real warships during peace time which is costly overkill mostly perhaps. Costly in terms of reduces chance in a real warship being available when needed because some equipment in maintenance/replacement.

Adding more equipment would also mean more time on maintenance therefore a little reduced time in patrolling.

Just 2 cents. Perhaps more such ships are needed, may be in a batch of 2/3 but looking at the ship it looks like each of such ship are sufficient. In any case, even a boat of Indian Navy must not be attacked without huge overall damage to attackers which should be made clear in patrolling doctrines etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 22:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
According to Livefist, INS Tarkash (F46), the second of the three Improved Talwar class guided missile Frigate has arrived in Desh and joined the Western Naval Command.
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2012/12/here-she-is-ins-tarkash-arrives-in.html

Improved Talwar class and the Project 17 Shivalik class have given a huge fillip to our blue-water capability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Dec 2012 23:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 9807
Location: India
Some of the reports by the press are quite juvenile and often hilarious.One would give more credence if the report was from "official sources".However,being a new nuclear boat,it is quite possible that even after sea trials before delivery,glitches take place.If you study the recent history of nuclear boats in western navies,particularly that of the USN and RN,some of their latest and most touted boats have experienced major problems.We aren't even mentioning the problems of the subs of OZ here!

The delivery of the second batch-2 of the Talwar class is a welcome development.These frigates,based upon the decades old Cold War Krivak DDG hull,have proved their worth.Delivered in pretty quick time,these Brahmos armed frigates will now join the Rajputs (mod-Kashins) in carrying our most lethal anti-ship missile.VAYU reporting from Izvestia,says that B'mos is now equipped with a new sat guidance system,
"borrowed from the cruise missile X-555 and its latest version X-101",which use the GLONASS system to increase its range and precision.

"The integration of B'mos and X-555 systems has produced a 'super missile' with sub-strategic capability beyond its tactical range.Fired from land,sea or air,it can hit targets at ranges from '300-500km' and is also capable of carrying a nuclear warhead,continued the Russian official.This is very good news indeed,as the improved B'mos,will be able to carry part of our strategic deterrent if need be.Especially useful if our conventional AIP subs of the future are equipped with B'mos,adding to our nuclear SSBN boats,giving us a very useful number of cost-effective solutions to dealing with the Paki threat in particular.

The air-launched version which will be carried by our SU-30MKIs will also be able to carry a tactical nuclear armed B'mos with a stand-off range of 500+km.

PS:Read this report on the RN's latest Astute class SSN.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scott ... bn-1507929

Quote:
Admiral admits teething problems with £1.5bn nuclear submarine
28 Dec 2012 00:01

THE HMS Astute has been dogged by several design and construction faults, and was grounded off Skye in 2010.
The HMS Astute The HMS Astute

AN admiral yesterday admitted the launch of a £1.5billion nuclear submarine had been a shambles.

Defence chiefs heralded HMS Astute as the most advanced sub in the world when she arrived at Faslane in 2009. But the first of seven planned hunter-killer vessels was dogged by a series of design and construction faults.

And there was more embarrassment when she grounded off Skye in 2010.

The incident led to the commander being removed. The MoD had also said the Astute would be able to make 29 knots but the Record revealed how one naval whistleblower described the boat as having a “V8 engine with a Morris Minor gearbox”.

Yesterday, the head of the Navy’s £10billion sub programme, Simon Lister, admitted Astute had had a “difficult birth” and lessons had been learned in the building of the latest vessel, Ambush.

He added: “I wish I could buy a submarine as if it was a Mercedes-Benz coming off the production line after 10 years of development. It isn’t that.”

But the Navy insist the Astute is on schedule to make her debut in 2013.

Admiral Lister said: “Every aspect of that submarine has been tested to the limit. We have learned lessons and every engineering development that we put into Astute has gone into or is going into Ambush.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 00:23 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 May 2012 22:34
Posts: 355
The Brahmos as it is will never fit into a SSK. I have a feeling even Soryu will have a tough time fitting them. I would hope the SSK carry Klub/Excocet and Nirbhay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 10:24 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16
Posts: 966
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... 8s-380553/

interesting titbit from article


The P-8A, based on the commercial 737-800ERX, is due to replace the Navy's aging Lockheed P-3s for maritime surveillance and anti-submarine warfare. The aircraft will work closely with about 60 Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Tritons, unmanned aircraft that will be used to identify and guide the armed P-8As to the target.


So obvious question .. how capable is the Neptune without the MQ 4C ??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 10:35 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
MQ-4C being cheaper and longer duration will function as a wider set of 'eyes' and lord knows the USN wants to cover huge swathes of sea.
same or better sensors will be onboard the P8 as well.

btw the IN is also reported to be interested in the MQ4C BAMS 6-8 units initially. so is australia and perhaps many others.

it is inevitable given the size limitations of Heron which is one level below the MQ4C ghawk size. for deep ocean surveillance from very high alt the herons are not enough.

we should see movement in next fiscal year after aeroindia 2013.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 10:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 9807
Location: India
Bheeshma,B'mos fitted onto Amurs in an 8 silo configuration have been shown in model form at past Aero-India air shows.,The same is poss. on Kilos as well.It just needs another hull section to be fitted to the sub,but will need a more powerful engine or AIP module as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 11:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Nov 2011 21:43
Posts: 484
Thought I will post this interesting video of component ship building... the video shows how super structures of USS Zumwalt is moved and mated with other structural components... our shipyards need to build this level of sophistication to churn out ships in no time... however we need to probably tear down existing shipyards before starting this journey...



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 13:09 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Sep 2011 07:22
Posts: 330
Philip wrote:
Bheeshma,B'mos fitted onto Amurs in an 8 silo configuration have been shown in model form at past Aero-India air shows.,The same is poss. on Kilos as well.It just needs another hull section to be fitted to the sub,but will need a more powerful engine or AIP module as well.


Brahmos is 8.4m long - so VLS is out of question because Amur is 6.4m high (both numbers from Wiki). It is also 600mm in diameter - but Amur only has 533mm torpedo tubes.

Either we go for a 'mini-brahmos' that can fit in a 533mm TT or we go for bigger subs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 18:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 9807
Location: India
SRIN,models of Amurs with Brahmos have been displayed at Aero-India shows and Def-Expos before.The design exists.I have pics of these somewhere in my archives,which will require an archaeological dig to unearth! Amurs also come in several sizes to suit the needs/budgets of navies.The long gestation of the basic sub,ironing out all glitches,now finally in production for the Russian navy,is also being offered to the IN for its next line of conventional subs after Scorpene production.

Here is the link to the pic of the model of the sub.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BrahM ... aqette.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 19:06 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
looks like the model might not exactly be to scale but in any case, a arihant style smooth humpback section is visible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 20:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18
Posts: 676
Prithwiraj wrote:
.. our shipyards need to build this level of sophistication to churn out ships in no time... however we need to probably tear down existing shipyards before starting this journey...



No need. GRSE and MDL have modular shipbuilding capabilities. The rest of them could also get such capability in short order. The only impediments are money, expertise and above all a desire for change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 21:13 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18
Posts: 676
Philip wrote:
The long gestation of the basic sub,ironing out all glitches,now finally in production for the Russian navy,is also being offered to the IN for its next line of conventional subs after Scorpene production.


The Lada class (Amur's domestic cousin) was deemed unsatisfactory in propulsion and sensors after sea trials of the first boat Sankt Peterburg. The construction of the remaining boats of this class has been halted as a result. The Russians also have an AIP system that is largely untested.

Given all these factors, it would far more risky for India to invest in Amur than in some Euro sub. However, according to various Indian Navy planners 75I was meant to go to the Russians as India was keen to absorb Russian submarine know-how in the eventual push to develop an indigenous diesel electric.

But IMO, even if we absorb Russian know-how, why should India look to building a diesel electric fleet instead of transitioning to a SSN fleet with bigger boats offering longer persistence and greater capabilities at sea. After all, India is already investing in nuclear propulsion for the SSBN program so it makes sense to leverage that technology and investment as much as possible. Also, the greater operational experience would use would develop a greater knowledge base and skill set towards making our nuclear propulsion quieter, safer and more reliable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 21:16 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Nov 2011 21:43
Posts: 484
Brando wrote:
Prithwiraj wrote:
.. our shipyards need to build this level of sophistication to churn out ships in no time... however we need to probably tear down existing shipyards before starting this journey...



No need. GRSE and MDL have modular shipbuilding capabilities. The rest of them could also get such capability in short order. The only impediments are money, expertise and above all a desire for change.


I thought the current shipyards are extremely crammed to facilitate such movement of super structured. Not talking of smaller vessels here...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2012 21:42 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18
Posts: 676
The problem isn't physical space but rather the limited dry-dock capacities and the archaic ship building practices in place. Besides, the surrounding areas are all industrial areas so the government can always acquire more land without any trouble of displacing people and such.

Ajai Shukla's blog has lots of pictures of the Goliath crane at MDL that is used to move 200-300 tonne blocks into place.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 02:47 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 964
Brando wrote:
But IMO, even if we absorb Russian know-how, why should India look to building a diesel electric fleet instead of transitioning to a SSN fleet with bigger boats offering longer persistence and greater capabilities at sea. After all, India is already investing in nuclear propulsion for the SSBN program so it makes sense to leverage that technology and investment as much as possible. Also, the greater operational experience would use would develop a greater knowledge base and skill set towards making our nuclear propulsion quieter, safer and more reliable.

I preached this for a while it simply doesn't make sense to spend close to 1 billion for diesel submarine that patrols at 10 knots and carries very limited payload. Unlike China we don't have choke points or straits for the subs to be most effective IMO we should be focusing on SSNs. Unless we can mass manufacture cheap (U-209 clones') for 100 million SSK for attrition warfare, Scorpenes' simply doesn't make sense to me in terms of getting the best bang for the buck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 10:52 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
Time. India navy will attain confidence about moving to ssn as mainstay only if arihant and sisters are deemed a operational success. That will be 2020 for decision time. Cost will likely be twice or thrice of even a uber expensive ssk given our low volume builds.

Plus additional deposits or supplies of uranium for naval reactors need to be found or tied up for. Our limited domestic supplies will be allocated at high priority for n warheads first for sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 11:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Nov 2011 02:49
Posts: 1742
Location: krishna's thandai, Assi ghaat, banaras
^^^ i wonder if the us navy wants to sell us some ssk s and ssn s?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 12:30 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
buying or leasing some 688I SSN from USN stock has been mooted as a alternative to Aus submarine woes but looks like they want new build SSK.
USN has no SSK, no production facility for SSK and no plans to build such a class...thats why Taiwan has been left high and dry on that front - germany is unwilling to risk trade ties by selling their U-boats. and probably neither is france or spain.
russia is an option, but they would rather sell subs in volume to Cheen.

I dont think the US govt can just lease us nuclear submarines...far too much political opposition to such moves I would imagine....


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5428 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 ... 136  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group