Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/n ... epage=true
Igor Leonav, chief commissioner of Sevmash, who is heading the guarantee team to India, said the carrier controlled 778 flights during trials. There were 88 landings, too, all piloted by Russians. The carrier’s jamming capability was demonstrated when the Sukhoi-33s, Kamovs, MiG-29s and the early warning aircraft A-50 all failed to paint it on their radars, he said. The carrier’s radar, on the contrary, could pick oncoming aircraft from a distance of 350-400 km, said Mr. Leonav.

A Jammer can reduce the distance at which the target can be detected but there are many modes and types of jamming , some one knowledge of EW can explain here ?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Singha »

it may not evade detection by passive EW assets because certain things like low power navigation radar and ATC radar will have to operate even if 3D air search radar is switched off. even the location of the KA31 emitter could point to where the CG is because the KA31 cannot roam too far out.

but it does need to jam inbound ASM radars which are hopefully far less power and less ECCM...apart from softkill/hardkill measures.
member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by member_23455 »

I remember a separate thread being opened for IAC-1. Does Vikramaditya not get one given the deluge will start from tomorrow?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

Singha wrote:it may not evade detection by passive EW assets because certain things like low power navigation radar and ATC radar will have to operate even if 3D air search radar is switched off. even the location of the KA31 emitter could point to where the CG is because the KA31 cannot roam too far out.

but it does need to jam inbound ASM radars which are hopefully far less power and less ECCM...apart from softkill/hardkill measures.
I read that even Passive System are fooled by making it harder to select the signal of interest among the noise or sending out inaccurate signal information to passive ESM in order to deceive it.
Found something on Jamming http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/fun/part11.htm

Having said that I wish they dont comment officially on Vikramaditiya EW capability and more so give figures and ranges ..knowing it can jam a AWACS is a good thing but giving figures like 400 km etc gives the enemy lot of fodder to think over i feel .
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

RajitO wrote:I remember a separate thread being opened for IAC-1. Does Vikramaditya not get one given the deluge will start from tomorrow?
MODS willing I have started a new thread , Thanks for the headsup
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Karan M »

Pratyush wrote:
Philip wrote: The carrier's jamming capability was demonstrated when SU-33s,MIG-29s and Kamovs ,including an A-50AEW aircraft couldn't pick up the carrier ,while the carrier could pick up incoming aircraft at a range of around 350-400km.However,there is no integral air defence capability on the vessel,SAMs or CIWS,which will be retrofitted later on.Fine tuning of all systems will be done during its voyage to India.This is perhaps the most important acquisition by the IN in its history,given the sheer scale of the asset,size of crew,air assets,etc.The next most important acquisitions have been the desi-built ATV,INS Arihant and the second N-sub from Russia,the Akula-2 Chakra.The Viraat and Vikrant also rank as the most important acquisitions ever.
I think that the portion in bold is pure BS, for the following reasons.

1) Any airborne system with even a hint of ESM measures will pick up a radar's emissions from beyond the radars detection range.
2) A jammier is essentially a RF noise maker, to prevent prevent identification. So while the noise is being made, all the opposite side has to do is listen and probe the source of the noise for its nature. It will complicate the job, but to say that it prevented detection, is some thing that I find hard to accept.

JMT.
There is noise jamming and then there is deception jamming. Qn is which did the carrier employ.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

The Indo-Israeli LR SAM,Barak-8 is in trouble,according to the TOI news report in BR's top stories.Posted here again.The venture is a JV,a very crucial one as it impacts upon the area air defence of IN warships.We went in for the anti-missile Barak when Trishul fizzled out after years of development effort.Right now,Barak is mired in the usual MOD scam controversies,the IN desperately needs more barak-1s apart from the LR version which is meant for the DDGs being completed at MDL and even the Vikramaditya being delivered to India without any air defence wahtsoever! One seriously wonders whether the IN has got its sums right on this one.There appears to be no plan B for the failure of the LR Barak.A deadline must be fixed beyond which at least the Shtil SAM already in service must be installed,or an alternative that can be quickly installed acquired post haste.One must also examine how this JV appears to be failing to deliver when we also have very successful JVs like Brahmos .
India-Israel joint venture to manufacture missiles fails to take off
Jatinder Kaur Tur, TNN Nov 14, 2013, 12.01PM IST

HYDERABAD: The joint venture between India's Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and Israeli Aerospace Industry to manufacture Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LR SAM) and Medium Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) has turned out to be a non-starter.

The long range missiles were to have been delivered to the Indian Navy by 2012 while the medium range missiles should be in the Indian Air Force weaponry by 2017. However, both the delivery schedules are way behind schedule and show no signs of meeting them even in the near future.

DRDO officials are blaming the lack of progress in the joint venture due to lack of transparency and non-transfer of technology by their Israeli counterparts. And the recent trials that were conducted by the Indian defence organization failed to meet the standards of both the IAF and the Indian Navy. The entire cost of Rs 12,500 crore of the joint venture is being funded by India and the inordinate delay and lack of progress in the project has turned into a big cause of worry in the defence ministry.

According to sources, the LR-SAMs project was commissioned in 2006 and the delivery of the missiles to the Indian Navy should have happened by 2012. Similarly, the MR-SAM venture was signed in 2009 and the missiles are to be delivered to the Indian Air Force by 2017. Both both the projects are way behind schedule and show no signs of making progress.

"Frankly speaking, right now, not much is going on in the joint venture due to various issues between the two sides. Expecting Israel to share its technology with India is unfair. But such things should have been clarified before the joint venture was entered into," said an official.

DRDO is maintaining that it is because of the lack of transfer of technology that the trials conducted so far have ended up as failures. "Industries are merely getting the drawings as to how to produce certain systems and such things are leading to deviations from the laid down specifications because the knowledge to develop the systems is not being imparted," said sources.


DRDO officials are also attributing the delay to a complicated and long procedure involving shuttling between India and Israel for various stages of development of a system etc. The Hyderabad-based Indian defence organization also reportedly found itself helpless on problems in propulsion system and other related issues while a significant number of parts or systems are yet to be tested following a delay in manufacturing.

However, when quizzed on the issue, DRDO Director General Avinash Chander told the TOI that nothing was amiss. "Everything is going on as per the plan and development trials are on. We shall be able to deliver the MR-SAMs as per schedule. Right now, the contribution from India in the joint venture project is about 20% and would ultimately reach 80% in the final stages." Regarding the already delayed LR-SAM, DRDO officials declined to come on record.

MR-SAM, one of the major demands of the forces, is to have a range of 70 kms or so, and the IAF is banking on replacing its ageing Soviet-made Pechora SAM missiles with the MR-SAMs. But nobody is sure how long the wait is going to be, and whether the delivery will take place at all.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19285
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by NRao »

I think India seriously needs to figure out what each acronym means - ToT, JV, Plan (granted not an acronym), ....................
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

2nd P-8I Neptune Maritime Patrol Aircraft delivered to India

Image

The first P-8I recently completed testing its weapons capabilities, including successfully firing a Harpoon missile at a target and dropping a torpedo.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Karan M »

NRao wrote:I think India seriously needs to figure out what each acronym means - ToT, JV, Plan (granted not an acronym), ....................
They know this. But these too good to refuse offers appear magically out of nowhere and then are forced down the throat of unwilling partners who are then made to take the public fall. Hints are made that other programs may not get through etc.
BTW, it speaks volumes that the original agreement for the first LRSAMs will have 80% of the content from Israel. This is nothing but another repackaged Brahmos sort of scam, but at least in that, the Yakhont was at least heavily developed to leverage upon, and the Indian side could draw on the Akash/Prithvi programs for the rest of the ground systems. In this LRSAM, apart from the propulsion, pretty much everything else is Israeli and we hope they will transfer TOT to Indian agencies to make the rest "eventually" in India. And its also clear that having focused on their own programs as a first priority, the Israelis are only now focusing on the LRSAM which means all the details expected by Indian SMEs/Mfg to do their bit, as local R&D usually provides, ain't gonna happen either.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5397
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^

In a reversal, here is a case where a delay in JV/foreign will benefit an indigenous product. It is very likely more Akash SAM could be bought if significant delays are expected.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by vasu raya »

chackojoseph wrote:2nd P-8I Neptune Maritime Patrol Aircraft delivered to India

Image

The first P-8I recently completed testing its weapons capabilities, including successfully firing a Harpoon missile at a target and dropping a torpedo.
They should add Harpy sized UAVs with folding wings that can be launched from the P-8I, very helpful in scenarios like

intelligence gathering before the recent commando raid on west mall attack group's hideout or as reinforcements if the UAV is armed noting that the commando raid was aborted after facing strong resistance

mapping the devastation in Philippines before relief aid is sent in

combating piracy, again armed UAV's would be like pre-empting the hostage situation

if the recovery is over sea, it could be similar to Harpy's else it should be able to land on runways. Air launching it gives a head start before a Naval vessel arrives in the region, so longer the endurance of such UAV the better.

Even the fifth engine point on 747's could be used depending on the mission type, wonder if a C-17 has such a vacant mount point or just release it from the cargo hold.
Last edited by vasu raya on 16 Nov 2013 20:45, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Karan M »

SRai, could be.. Akash orders were gutted so that the state of the art, long range yada yada LR/MRSAM would be procured at development costs that dwarf Indian programs. Lets see..
nash
BRFite
Posts: 946
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by nash »

If this LR/MR SAM project fail to take off and GoI call it off then it will has immediate adverse effect on P-15A destroyers but in the long-run it CAN be blessing in disguise and it can push DRDO/IN(known for its indenigisation) work together to get the naval variant of AAD or 200-300km SAM, which DRDO talked about recently or AD1/2 in future for P-15B and P-17A project in next 5-10 years.

Meanwhile, IN can opt for some stop-gap measure like AEGIS or patriot(IAF).

But there I, don't know, sense a conspiracy here by Khans or others, they know IN/IAF in dire need of SAM in range of 70-120 Km and currently homegrown BMD is not fully mastered, though looks promising, to has spin-off, like MRSAM or SM series like missile.

I might be wrong here but if this deal get cancelled then to rectify the immediate adverse effect various foreign companies can get benefited through FMS route.

just my thought.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17169
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Rahul M »

I wonder why we simply didn't modify the AAD as a SAM and use it for LRSAM/MRSAM.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19285
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by NRao »

What exactly was wrong with Trishul? I would think there is enough core competency to risk a revival of that missile.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by John »

NRao wrote:What exactly was wrong with Trishul? I would think there is enough core competency to risk a revival of that missile.
Even after the kinks were worked out Trishul doesn't have vertical launch capability, i believe what was proposed was boxy 8 cell launcher for the navy for Brahmaputra compare that with 24 VL Barak cells. VL could have incorporated like with Sea wolf but i doubt IN would have willing to foot the bill especially with Barak already being available and more or less IMO Trishul/Barak/Sea wolf are pretty much past generation point defense systems. The shift is towards self guided missiles' with network centric capability like Spyder, Vl-mica, RAM, CAAM etc

IMO we should work on developing a AAD missile for the navy that can be dual packed into Brahmos launchers which would given us the needed long range air defense capability that is currently lacking even with Barak-8.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

What is curious about the LR SAM JV with the Israelis is that they have already perfected the missile for their forces.That being the case,at least an initial batch of missiles for the DDGs at MDL should be in the immediate pipeline.The TOT,local manufacture,etc., can come on later.Whether the delay is deliberate as the IN's SAM crisis extends to immediate requirements of Barak-1 for other warships is well known,could be a factor,the Israelis wanting that deal/order to be executed before moving onto B-8 deliveries. However,whatever the truth of the matter,this is yet another case of the MOD botching up a key requirement for the forces.Imagine a situ where because of babudom and suspicions,we blacklist or stall almost every foreign manufacturer when we cannot deliver more than 30% of our needs indigenously,how the armed forces will cope with decades old weapon systems held together with string,tape and a prayer!


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... alry-china

India buys third aircraft carrier amid rivalry with China


Conal Urquhart and agencies
theguardian.com, Saturday 16 November 2013

The Indian Navy's aircraft carrier Viraat is reaching the end of its service. Photograph: Kamal Kishore/Reuters

India has heightened its rivalry with China by taking possession of its third aircraft carrier, a refurbished Soviet-era vessel.

The £1.4bn ($2.3bn) aircraft carrier, handed over on Saturday at a north Russian shipyard, will help India to counterbalance the expansion of the Chinese navy.

The 45,000-tonne ship, built in the final years of the Soviet Union and named the Admiral Gorshkov, will be escorted by warships to India on a two-month voyage from Russia's northern coast. It has been renamed INS Vikramaditya.

A recent upgrade means the carrier, originally designed to carry Yak-38 vertical take-off aircraft, has been re-equipped to carry Mig-29K fighter jets. It can carry up to 30 aircraft and will have a crew of around 2,000.

China and India, the world's most populous countries, co-existed peacefully for centuries but relations became strained after the Communist party won the Chinese civil war in 1948. There were three conflicts between the neighbours in the second half of the 20th century, although since 1987, Sino-Indian trade has grown rapidly. India views China's relations with Pakistan with suspicion and China is concerned over Indian activity in the South China Sea. In March this year, tensions between troops were defused after a three-week standoff along their disputed border.

India signed the deal to buy the carrier in 2004 after a decade of negotiations. Its reconditioning was to be finished in 2009, but the price was increased and delivery postponed until 2012 under a new agreement, according to the Indian navy.

The handover was later delayed by another year.

India's first, British-built, aircraft carrier was bought in the 1960s and was decommissioned in 1997. Another ex-British carrier, the INS Viraat, is reaching the end of its service.

In August, India launched its first home-built carrier. The 37,500-tonne INS Vikrant is expected to undergo extensive trials in 2016 before being inducted into the navy by 2018.

India is the world's largest arms buyer and Russia's biggest arms customer, buying about 60% of its arms needs from there. But it has started to look for new suppliers and aims to build more hardware itself as part of plans to spend $100bn in the next 10 years on modernising its military. It has recently rolled out new military purchase rules to attract local companies into the sector.

The INS Vikramaditya was commissioned into the Indian navy at the Sevmash shipyard in Severodvinsk, on the White Sea, in a ceremony attended by the Russian deputy prime minister, Dmitry Rogozin, and Indian defence minister, AK Antony.

China put its first-ever aircraft carrier, another retooled Soviet-made craft called the Liaoning, into service in 2011 amid tensions with Japan over contested islands and a show of strength in the South China Sea.

In the past year China has been involved in a series of territorial spats with Japan over islets in the East China Sea; and with the Philippines, Vietnam and others over the South China Sea, the location of essential shipping lanes and important natural resources, including oil and gas.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

Rahul M wrote:I wonder why we simply didn't modify the AAD as a SAM and use it for LRSAM/MRSAM.
There was this article posted by tsarkar some time back written by DRDO chief as to why Barak-8 was chosen over AAD.

To put it plainly , Barak-8 is far more manouverable and has high energy to deal with manouvering targets and aircraft in end game while AAD is more optimised for BMD role.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

Hindustan Shipyard has received an order for a special ship. It is probably akin to Yuanwang 2 or some other design, but in letter and spirit it appears to be a communication ship. Nature of the ship seems to be under wraps.

I have no other details to offer.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Singha »

expected. I dont know how we are managing to track our LR launches from balasore. maybe navy ships are being used. a proper ship would permit tracking ICBM 3rd stage and weapons payload all the way up and down due to much larger dedicated radars. I think at present we might be losing track of them as the ceiling goes over 150km and then reacquire them with another ship as it plunges down.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

I don't know if its already known. Two units of P-75I will be direct import from the tender winner. Tender is shortly.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19285
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by NRao »

chackojoseph wrote:I don't know if its already known. Two units of P-75I will be direct import from the tender winner. Tender is shortly.
Aug 2013: http://m.financialexpress.com/news/rfp- ... n/1153163/
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

Ok, Since the news is already there.

The VLS part is going to see delay in P-75I too.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by tsarkar »

Austin wrote:
Rahul M wrote:I wonder why we simply didn't modify the AAD as a SAM and use it for LRSAM/MRSAM.
There was this article posted by tsarkar some time back written by DRDO chief as to why Barak-8 was chosen over AAD. To put it plainly , Barak-8 is far more manouverable and has high energy to deal with manouvering targets and aircraft in end game while AAD is more optimised for BMD role.
Here is it - http://www.indianexpress.com/news/indoi ... y/442501/0#
A stickler for transparency, Antony asked DRDO to address the concerns expressed by opposition parties....DRDO: MRSAM is four times more manoeuvrable than AAD. AAD performs sub-optimally while engaging aircraft in tail-chase mode, reducing the air defence engagement envelope.
AAD is a high speed missile that manoeuvers by thrust vectoring / skidding & hits a fast ballistic missile. An analogy would be a bullet.

MRSAM can turn & weave & climb using flight control surfaces and engage high performance aircraft that manoeuver using flight control surfaces. An analogy would be that it flies like a boomerang or like the Sudarshan Chakra chases fleeing demons from heavens to the seas in Amar Chitra Kathas (poor analogies, but best I could think of).

Also click on the image in the article that has good & accurate diagrams of all 3 missiles. Akash weighs 720 kg & goes 25 km. AAD weighs 1275 kg & goes 25 km. Barak-8 weighs only 276 kg yet goes 70 km. Barak 8 is also smaller 4.5 m vis a vis 5.8 meter Akash & 7.3 meter AAD. Allowing more rounds on a ship.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by John »

tsarkar wrote:Also click on the image in the article that has good & accurate diagrams of all 3 missiles. Akash weighs 720 kg & goes 25 km. AAD weighs 1275 kg & goes 25 km. Barak-8 weighs only 276 kg yet goes 70 km. Barak 8 is also smaller 4.5 m vis a vis 5.8 meter Akash & 7.3 meter AAD. Allowing more rounds on a ship.
tsarkar good points but 25 Km is AAD's ceiling not range it has intercepted Prithvi targets over 70 km from the point of origin. As per earlier interview AAD can be modified into SAM with a range of over 100 km (comparable to Russian 48N6 which also has similar BMD capability).
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17169
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Rahul M »

it should be more than 100km in range given the altitude limit is 35 km IIRC, similar to most of the S-300 missiles. thanks for that article though.
member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by member_23694 »

heard a retd. Naval officer in TV when asked about the planned lease of 2nd Nuke sub from Russia , he said
- Not aware about the status regarding it
- if there are 10 nuke sub on offer grab all of them.

this sounds interesting and seems to point to the direction of the kind of force the Indian Navy aspire for itself :)
How about a couple of Borei class SSBN too
I am all for it 8) .
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19285
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by NRao »

I think they are fairly desperate to get subs. Any kind in good condition.
vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by vishvak »

If any kind in good conditions is one indicator then why not submarines without biggest missiles that could be quicker to build than otherwise.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Philip »

Dhiraj,I'm not sure if we can operate a Borei class SSBN as of now.Furthermore,Russia is to build more of the class for its own requirements,a fleet of at least 6 for its sub-based leg of the nuclear triad.Due to intl. agreements,only the so-called P-5 nations share SSBN tech and their missiles (Trident for the RN for example).It is best that we build our own,as any strat. missiles would have to be Indian in origin.Russian help though always welcome.

The current crisis in our conventional sub fleet has to be urgently met,as of "yesterday". Perhaps a deal for both extra Akulas and conventional subs could be worked out on the FMS approach.Extending the life of old Kilos by another decade as offered, is a neccessity.A comprehensive package for the same could be worked out.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Singha »

Putin has authorized 5 more Borei2 subs after the current 3 Borei1. so looks like they will retire all the rest delta3 and delta4 by 2025 and move to a all-Borei fleet of 8 submarines. typhoons are already scrapped. land based topol-M single warhead units will be exchanged for mirv yars.

this seems on highest priority rather than more SSNs else they would have completed and used the unfinished Akula for RuN.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5729
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Kartik »

Can someone please explain why the f**k will 6 conventional diesel subs with AIP and Brahmos end up costing us nearly $2 billion each?! How is such an absurd amount being bandied about and how on earth is the MoD or the IN able to justify such a ridiculous amount for a diesel sub?
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

Kartik wrote:Can someone please explain why the f**k will 6 conventional diesel subs with AIP and Brahmos end up costing us nearly $2 billion each?! How is such an absurd amount being bandied about and how on earth is the MoD or the IN able to justify such a ridiculous amount for a diesel sub?
P-15A is $1.8 Billion. Just imagine.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5729
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Kartik »

astronomical amounts..really..and the IN and GoI kept cribbing about the price escalation for the INS Vik whereas a freakin' diesel sub will end up costing nearly the same amount!! Where is the logic I ask you !?
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

Any mention of follow on 3 x Krivak IV order?
RKumar

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by RKumar »

Personal guess ...

I don't think IN will order complete ship(s) from Russia. It is most probably that we will be arm twisted but don't think that will work.

2nd no clear sub is different ball game altogether but there also p**** sticker will decide.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12427
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

^^^

The P 75i will cost only a little less than the Virgina class boat. At 1.8 Billion USD, we are paying the near equivalent of an AIGIS class destroyer. Minus the flexibility brought about by the MK 41 VLS.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Post by Austin »

Kartik wrote:astronomical amounts..really..and the IN and GoI kept cribbing about the price escalation for the INS Vik whereas a freakin' diesel sub will end up costing nearly the same amount!! Where is the logic I ask you !?
Let me guess time is the key factor here .....The MMRCA deal 2-3 years back was quoted at $10-12 billion and today we know from Dassult CEO recent statement it will cost more than $20 Billion !

Depending on what you negotiate for and what TOT you opt for ......The P-75I deal will most likely be signed in 2015-2018 ie some where around 12th file year plan or beginning of 13th assuming all the stars are lined up perfectly.( likely induction will be between 2020-2025 )

The Scorpene deal was approved in 2005 and cost $3 Billion for 6 subs and likely P-75 I deal would be approved 10-12 years later and will cost 4x time more assuming the TOT etc are all similar.

I believe the key factor is time and the subsequent Rupee/$ depreciation and military inflation thats runs twice the civil inflation. So any value and payments would be adjusted to yearly inflation over the period when the final sub gets delivered.

Had we signed the deal say 2-3 years after Scorpene deal we could be got the six sub with AIP and VLS for $5-6 billion including TOT , Training , Weapons purchase etc.

Even P-15A cost is higher as the cost has been revised many times by CCSA as the initial estimate went haywire due to delays and cost overruns and opting for risky venture like Barak-8 which put the entire commisioning of capital ship at the mercy of single weapon system..then to we are not sure if $1.8 billion is the final cost or even that would be revised. There was a link from Ajai shukla article we posted many months back where the revised scheduled payment for P-15/A was shown and if IIRC there were revision made thrice till the cost reached a staggering level.

We tend to abuse every one in the world for delays and incompetencies but the MOD never talks about its own highest caliber incompetencies when it comes to the entire procurement process which runs into decades or the SY manager ever booted due signigicant delays
Post Reply