Indian Naval Discussion

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 09 Oct 2011 12:28

Which one is better/timewise best choicePD/PESA/AESA radar may start an endless event of debates. Atleast my intention is not to start such thread right now.
As a matter of study:
Detailed spec. of Zhuk AESA: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Zhuk-AE-Analysis.html
&
A brief historical account of radar competition between US/Russia with relative merits & demerits: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

I presume that almost all of us/most of us have already gone through it. What prevented Russia from achieving its first AESA is inaccessibility to GaN (Gallium Nitride) HEMT technology. In 90’s it was US’s monopoly and came the legacy APG 73 series evolution to APG 79 (for super Hornets & othrs.) From 2000 onwards other countries strted producing the same with even better power rating. And result is Zhuk AESA (simpler than APG79) but comparable/ even better in performance than the US one. Infact Phazotron may soon go for all transistor makeover for Zhuk AESA which will outperform anyone (e.g. BARS on Su 30 MKI) except APG-77(V)2 (F-22A Raptor). A truly futuristic evolution which will influence another couple of decades to come. One can verywell understand the merit of semiconductor technology over others.

As for PD, Pulse-Doppler processing: Echoes originating from a radiated burst are transformed to the spectral domain using a discrete fourier transform (DFT). In the spectral domain, stationary clutter can be removed because it has a Doppler frequency shift which is different from the Doppler frequency shift of the moving target. The range and velocity of a target can be estimated with increased SNR due to coherent integration of echoes [7]. Source: wikipedia
And possible shortcomings are:

Scan time is a critical factor for some systems because vehicles moving at or above the speed of sound can travel one mile (1.6 km) every few seconds, like the Exocet, Harpoon, Kitchen, and Air-to-air missile. The maximum time to scan the entire volume of the sky must be on the order of a dozen seconds or less for systems operating in that environment.
Pulse-Doppler radar by itself can be too slow to cover the entire volume of space above the horizon, unless multiple simultaneous beams are used.
Pulse-Doppler antenna motion must be slow enough so that all the return signals from at least 3 different PRF can be processed out to the maximum anticipated detection range. This is known as dwell time.[6] Antenna motion for pulse-Doppler must be as slow as radar using MTI.
Search radar that include pulse-Doppler are usually dual mode because best overall performance is achieved when pulse-Doppler is used for areas with high false alarm rates (horizon or below and weather), while conventional radar will scan faster in free-space where false alarm rate is low (above horizon with clear skies).
The antenna type is an important consideration for multi mode radar because undesirable phase shift introduced by the radar antenna can degrade Measure of Performance for sub-clutter visibility.. Sorce: wikipedia

Infact first batch of Su30 MKI, as prpoposed by IAF, may see AESA upgradation by 2015 or so, not long after its first introduction.

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 09 Oct 2011 18:27

ARay wrote:Which one is better/timewise best choicePD/PESA/AESA radar may start an endless event of debates. Atleast my intention is not to start such thread right now.
As a matter of study:
Detailed spec. of Zhuk AESA: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Zhuk-AE-Analysis.html
&
A brief historical account of radar competition between US/Russia with relative merits & demerits: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

I presume that almost all of us/most of us have already gone through it. What prevented Russia from achieving its first AESA is inaccessibility to GaN (Gallium Nitride) HEMT technology. In 90’s it was US’s monopoly and came the legacy APG 73 series evolution to APG 79 (for super Hornets & othrs.)
...
...

There's no open source info on deployed/deployable GaN HEMT based MMICs as yet and the radar sets that you are referring are all based on GaAs based HEMTs.
The GaAs and GaN merit/demerits etc were discussed waaay back in 2006/07 here but here's one post of mine from '09 which does touch on this, albeit briefly.
GaAs vs GaN
Do have a look - and that post does have the link to the further extensive discussion during 2006/07.

Carlo Kopp's articles are a good compilation no doubt, but certainly not the be-all end-all and quite a bit of it has been dissected here in quite detail in the past - so I'll urge you to search around and cross-validate and make up your own conclusions/understanding.

Betw, just FYI, there's a GaAs foundry setup in GAETEC Hyderabad, Kerala

way back and there have been reports on GaN HEMT based work has started in recent past (the details/reporting are of course very sparse/sketchy as expected).

ARay · Post by **ARay** » 10 Oct 2011 13:22

I saw 2006-07 post. However its 2011 and Toshiba has started manufacturing TGI7785-50L

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Toshiba+A ... 0227230268

I feel what you require is a detailed technical discussion and sort of final countdown. Well, I would like to devote my time on this but it will be a rather lengthy post and will take some of my working time. I will definitely be back with this AESA subject (which is very interesting indeed).

Meanwhile Philip Guru may chant some of his deep thoughts; not hearing him for some time.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Oct 2011 17:55

http://www.incat.com.au/domino/incat/in ... enDocument

this australian cos chinese subsidiary has kitted up the PLAN with those wave piercing catamarans you see armed with ASMs. pakis are getting it too. they seem to be a unique product niche.

the film above is for a bigger 100m long model the USMC/USarmy leased....perhaps we can obtain a few for rapid deployment of army units and logistics in the IOR region ? the range quoted is 4000 nm. USN was studying it as a MCMV. with 40knot transit speeds it can move faster to the reqd area. can transport 900 troops in shatabdi exp type chair car area.

tsarkar and other IN gurus , what do you think of this product?

its never going to be a full bore LPD/LPH but we are not going to have enough of such, this could be a gap filler and cheaper opex play?

James B · Post by **James B** » 11 Oct 2011 00:47

Sorry, if it is a repost. This is a video of INS Sindhughosh and the dining, living and working in the Submarine.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Oct 2011 11:52

"Deep Thought"....reminds me of Linda Lovelace..."Deep Throat"!!!

Here's a deep thought.I used to post a long time ago the need for the IN to consider a new class of heavy cruisers,even recommending the acquisition of the last Slava built which Ukraine owns.The reason for this is that we do not have a surface combatant that can truly escort a carrier in the enhanced threat scenario which has developed in recent years.We are now going to acquire 3 new carriers by 2010 and will need better vessel than improved Delhis for the job.The Delhis formidable though they might be,are designs from the 90s era.The third batch might suffice in some measure but not entirely.

The new cruisers I recommend,should possess long range super/hypersonic anti-ship missiles Hyper-Bmos/Shourya),LR cruise missiles like Tomahawk (NIrbhay),plus a large battery of LR SAMs (100+KM range) and other anti-air/missile defences both quick-reaction missiles and guns.A heavy gun 6"-8"(2 turrets as in the USN's DDX) is also required for fire support of amphib ops. with ER ammo upto 100+KM (The USN are developing a naval rail gun with kinetic projectiles which wiht their speed alone would destroy a modern warship),2 heavy helos (Merlin size) plus 2 UAVs (which can be stored below the flight deck through a small deck lift) and anti-sub missiles,rockets,etc. with increased range than existing systems.Sensors should be conformal to enhance stealth,plus a variety of sonars and even a tethered AEW system such as the Isaraelis are developing which draws its power from the ship through a power cable would give the warship enhanced detection for air,seaand undersea capabilities.

These cruisers will displace around 10-12000t in my estimation,twice the size of a Delhi class DDGH.Their propulsion would be CODOG.Whether we can develop an all-electric drive in the future remain to be seen.N-propulsion would be great,using the same reactor as the ATVs,but it might prove too expensive and would be preferable on future CVs of 65,000+t and LHPDs of upto 35/40,000t.

Interestingly,the Russians are to develop a new class of heavy cruiser ("destroyers") with many similar capabilities to those posted above,12-16 toi be built which will replace as they say,"three classes of warships" and be the most powerful afloat other than their Kirov class CBGNs.Here are some details

http://rt.com/news/navy-new-destroyer-project-441/

:
“It will be a universal warship, which will be able to replace three classes of vessels. Thanks to modern weapons it will surpass the Large ASW destroyers in anti-submarine warfare and modern surface combat destroyers and guided-missile ships in terms of surface firepower and air defense capabilities, with the exception of the [nuclear-powered battlecruiser] Peter the Great and other ships of that class,” the source said.
Key to such versatility will be rocket launch systems, which will be able to fire different types of missiles depending on the task. The destroyers will carry anti-ship guided missiles, anti-submarine rocket-propelled torpedoes, surface-to-surface cruise missiles and medium-to-long-range surface-to-air missiles. It will also have two to four twin artillery guns.
“At the moment different versions of the warship are being evaluated and the propulsion system is being chosen. Depending on the Navy’s needs and budget restrictions they will have nuclear or gas turbine propulsion,” the source added.
Earlier media reports said the new vessel, which has been in development since at least 2009, will have displacement of 9-10,000 tonnes or 12-14,000 tonnes, depending on the choice of propulsion system. It will carry two or three combat helicopters. Its hull will use stealth technology to lower the ships radar cross-section.
The destroyer will be equipped with modern tactical information and weapons control system similar in capabilities to the American AEGIS.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Oct 2011 15:35

^^^

Al that is well and good, but the IN will have to come up with the requirement and specify what roll they expect the ship to fulfill. The IN needs to start doing its own thing rather then copying or buying every thing the Rusies or soem other navy comes up with.

PS:- Having said so, I am a big fan of all gun big ships, and would like to see a return to those ships, but with modern munitions and guns. Perhaps a ship with 9 16 inch guns, with a range of 200 miles and a GPS / Radar guided shell weiging in at 2000 lbs. With 150 rounds per gun.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 11 Oct 2011 16:09

India, Japan to conduct first ever bilateral naval exercise next year

Positive move. the advantages of having a partnership with japes are manifold.

Japan is the only nation in that region, which is capable of protecting itself against a chinese aggression. Plus they are much more reliable then australians, if stronger ties are pursued.

India-Vietnamese partnership though is crucial, but is in no way equivalent to china-pakis nexus. In a short one-to-one war pakis possess much higher threat level then vietnam will ever be for china. In a dual war (if it ever happens) china-pakis sum will be much superior to indo-vietnami partnership. The positive aspect of this relationship in a war could be that china have to divert some amount of its forces on the vietnamese front.

However Vietnam relationship can act as a good irritant for china in "peace time". And that is the role this partnership should be aimed for.

On the other hand a quasi-alliance with japan can be of tremendous advantage to both india and japan.

First In case of a chinese aggression, it will force china to divide its military focus at two fronts. This when added with sore relation of chinese in south-china sea, will eat up a lot of chinese power away from actual war zone.

Second India and Japan possess weaponry of entirely different origin. This will be a major disadvantage for china. Say something which has been designed to exploit shortcomings of Aegis will not be that much good against Indian/russian systems. This holds true for everything battle tanks, cruise missiles, F-16/Su30, warships.. everything.

Point I want to make is, although chinese at any time will possess massive number of units. The share of units good in countering japanese won't be "that much" effective against Indians and vice versa. (Of course they can fight, but won't be optimized for that specific war). This will reduce the threat for both India and Japan. And will elevate the challenge for chinese.

Third, both India and Japan can place there naval units at each others ports. While any chinese naval units placed in srilanka, bangladesh, mayanmar and any Indian naval unit in vietnam are vastly exposed to enemy aggression in the event of conflict, units placed in Japanese and Indian naval bases will be much better protected. And can compliment there host's forces.

In peacetime as well this will be a major gain, and it will be beyond chinese power, to undo it with its pressure tactics. It can make it possible for us to have a permanent navy presence in that part of ocean. Something we are so afraid of that china will do in our neighborhood.

Lastly, On the level of economics, an alliance of Japan and India can be a true counter of Chinese.

This partnership in a way can be a permanent security guaranty for both India and Japan. Whenever it happens, if it ever do.

(I haven't included unkils role in the above discussion, which when added will definitely tilt the balance in our favor greatly, but the point is even without that these two nations can do very well)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Oct 2011 16:15

At the moment in terms of capabilities India brings very little to the table in order to help the Japanese in a real fight. However, over a period of time when the IN is capable of supporting operations in the Indo pacific ocean. This will be a great boost to the Japanese.

In this respect the exercise is a positive news and this needs to become an annual feature, in the future.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 11 Oct 2011 19:49

Boreas and Pratyush, let us not get too far at this point. Right now, India and Japan is engaged in confidence building measures and building a budding friendship. But by no means, when the first bullets fly, should we expect Japan to come to our aid militarily. I mean take a look at the Iraq War and Afghanistan War, Japan spent years dithering over whether to send combat SUPPORT troops! in fear of violating their pacifist constitution.

All in all, I wouldn't hold my breath over Japan doing something to help us. In a shooting war with China, the only help we are gonna get from Japan are some nice words and pats on the back and telling us to buckle up and grin and hope for the best. Militarily, Japan would not do anything to upset the Chinese and the Chinese are smart enough not to do anything stupid that would upset the Japanese. In short, China doesn't have to do that much to ensure a one front war with India.

To me, this kind of exercise is just a photo type exercise thing only good for the consumption of the masses but nothing tangible will come out of it. Nothing like the alliance between Japan and US.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 11 Oct 2011 20:58

In short, China doesn't have to do that much to ensure a one front war with India.

Thats the point, what I want to say is we should put efforts to make it a two way affair for china. Neither India need to fight for Japan, nor Japan need to come in aid of India.

We just have to create a scenario where China have to feel venerable at both ends. And hence in case of conflict have to maintain higher force level at both the fronts, instead of being able to divert maximum resources at one front.

We should put efforts to increase the threat perception for chinese.. may be gradually but to an extent where they are not free to plan adventures at there will.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 11 Oct 2011 21:20

Pratyush wrote:At the moment in terms of capabilities India brings very little to the table in order to help the Japanese in a real fight. However, over a period of time when the IN is capable of supporting operations in the Indo pacific ocean. This will be a great boost to the Japanese.

I respectfully disagree, with a military alliance (even a quasi one), Jap shipping through the IOR could be protected by IN, thus freeing up Jap maritime forces for the Indo-china see and the Western pacific. It is well within IN's and ICG's CURRENT CAPABILITY to protect Indian, Japnese, Korean ships in the IOR from Malacca straits up untill the Suez canal. Do you think Indian forces can't do this currently? It will be expensive, but so will sitting on our behind doing nothing?
This partnership can get the Babus get some ships ordered in double quick time from Kor / Jap shipyards and also prod our shipyards to move fast.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Oct 2011 21:27

^^^

The Japs don't face any threat in the IOR, nor do they face a credible threat in the Pacific. The Indian Navy must develop an ability to deal with the PLAN in the pacific before any future Indo-Jap alliance can become a force for peace.

But this is great development none the less.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 11 Oct 2011 21:41

If $hit hits the roof for Japan with the Panda, they will FACE a real threat to their shipping line in the IOR, what do you think the Chinese Pearls in the IOR will be doing, every Japan flagged ship will be fair game, even non-jap flagged ships with cargo from-to Japan will be targeted by the Panda and it poodles. This is where the IN comes in, remember how the former Japan PM Abe championed for greater co-op between SDREs and SYREs recently in Desh? why this sudden love for SDREs?

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 11 Oct 2011 21:43

On 30 October Nerpa leaves for final two-week test run with joint Indo-Russian team and is handed over to India no later than 22 November. That is - if nothing breaks down during the two weeks, of course.
Cross your fingers, gentlemen

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 11 Oct 2011 21:46

Shrinivasan wrote:If Shit hits the roof for Japs with the Panda, they will FACE a real threat to their shipping line in the IOR, what do you think the Chinese Pearls in the IOR will be doing, every Jap flagged ship will be fair game, even non-jap flagged ships with cargo from-to Japan will be targeted by the Panda and it poodles. This is where the IN comes in, remember how the former Jap PM Abe championed for greater co-op between SDREs and SYREs recently in Desh? why this sudden love for SDREs?

Again a reminder—'Japs' is a pejorative. Please edit. Thanks.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 12 Oct 2011 10:10

Apologies if posted before, but this picture is awesome

From http://vpk-news.ru/articles/5714

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 12 Oct 2011 14:18

SNaik wrote:On 30 October Nerpa leaves for final two-week test run with joint Indo-Russian team and is handed over to India no later than 22 November. That is - if nothing breaks down during the two weeks, of course.
Cross your fingers, gentlemen

Wanna bet that something happens and the date is shifted yet again?

I'm sure Rakesh is behind all the delays

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 Oct 2011 16:33

^^^

True, arranging for kaju ki barfi equaling the displacement of the Akula and shipping to all the BRFites will bankrupt him.

PS: Koshi ji, this is my revenge on you for having deleted my first BRF login and creating a new one with a wrong spelling

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Oct 2011 19:32

Its not good for your psyche to collect greviances/insults/injuries. It distorts your prespective.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 13 Oct 2011 06:03

India takes on ocean-cop role, tests China

New Delhi, Oct. 12: New Delhi today practically arrogated to itself policing rights in the Indian Ocean Region with defence minister A.K. Antony claiming it will give security cover to island nations.

The defence minister said the Indian Navy has been “mandated to be a net security provider to island nations in the Indian Ocean region”.

Such a claim is expected to rile China, most of all, and may even be objected to by other neighbours. The defence minister did not state which country (or countries) and which multilateral forum had given the Indian Navy the “mandate”.

The claim has come at a time when the Vietnamese President, Truong Tan Sang, is in India. In July this year, an Indian naval assault ship, the Airavat, was questioned by the Chinese in the South China Sea when it was sailing from one Vietnamese port to another. China claims almost all of the South China Sea and is involved in disputes over its waters with five nations.
:
:

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Oct 2011 10:20

ramana wrote:Its not good for your psyche to collect greviances/insults/injuries. It distorts your prespective.

Ramana ji,

You are no fun

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 13 Oct 2011 11:19

VinodTK wrote: India takes on ocean-cop role, tests China
:

SDREs are taking baby steps to stand up against the lizard. Wishing them good luch and a strong leadership. It is high time we build 10-12 destroyers and frigates post haste.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Oct 2011 18:53

The key to control of the IOR is to shut out the PLAN.While PLAN surface vessels at the moment pose little threat,with even the Varyag a couple of years away from being fully commissioned and operational,the massve number of PLAN subs,including N-subs makes it possible for it to ingress into the IOR by stealth.The dismal state of the IN's sub fleet ,the arrival of the Nerpa/Akula-2/3 notwithstanding,makes it a hard task for at least half adecade.Even when we possess the planned number of 24 subs,China will have 4 times that nymber and together with pak's dozen or so modern subs,can saturate the IOR,making it very difficult for the IN to sanitise the ocean that bears India's name.A forward presenece in the ndo-China Sea will no doubt help,but it is not a solution.The IN requires at least 36 nuclear and conventional subs to deal with the Sino-Paki threat simultaneously.This requires at least 6 SSGNs apart from our dedicated SSBNs,plus 12-16 new AIP missile-firing subs to serve alongside legacy U-boats/Kilos that have been upgraded.

PS:Adm.Koshy might yet get off the hook on his promise of tons of mithai when the Akula-2s arrive,as the IN's Akula,on examining the details of it after its arrivals,will tell us whether it is similar to the Gepard,which is actually a more advanced sub than an Akula-2 and should be labelled as a "3" version instead.If it is the same with the Nerpa/Chakra,then Adm.Koshy can technically escape "walking the plank"!

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 13 Oct 2011 19:27

Second phase of modernisation to start at Karwar naval base.

The second phase of modernisation of the Indian Navy's Karwar naval base will soon be put before the Union cabinet.

"The naval base at Karwar has become operational. The second phase of the project has been approved by me and it will soon be cleared by the union cabinet," defence minister AK Antony said today while addressing the three-day commander's conference of the Indian Navy.

Stressing that the second phase of the Karwar naval base must be pursued vigorously, he said the navy must synergise its efforts with the stakeholders to maximise maritime security. "The next phase of the project must now be pursued vigorously. The efforts of the navy in developing support infrastructure in our island territories must be in synergy with other stakeholders to maximise our maritime security," he said.

Observing that the modernisaton of navy has been going apace, Antony said the objective of the defence shipyards must be to remain competitive and to rank among the best in the world. "The modernisation of the navy has been going on apace. The navy had inducted stealth frigates INS Satpura, tanker Shakti and three Fast Attack Crafts and Fast Interceptor Crafts. Our shipyards must develop and expand rapidly and adopt the latest best practice," he said.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Oct 2011 23:05

VinodTK wrote:India takes on ocean-cop role, tests China In July this year, an Indian naval assault ship, the Airavat, was questioned by the Chinese in the South China Sea when it was sailing from one Vietnamese port to another. China claims almost all of the South China Sea and is involved in disputes over its waters with five nations.
:
:

I was flying from HK to SIngapore and this was the headlines in the Strait Times. This is big news in the south east asia islands. PRC giving a warning to Indian naval vessal was headline news.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 13 Oct 2011 23:11

Philip wrote:The key to control of the IOR is to shut out the PLAN.While PLAN surface vessels at the moment pose little threat,with even the Varyag a couple of years away from being fully commissioned and operational,the massve number of PLAN subs,including N-subs makes it possible for it to ingress into the IOR by stealth.The dismal state of the IN's sub fleet ,the arrival of the Nerpa/Akula-2/3 notwithstanding,makes it a hard task for at least half adecade.Even when we possess the planned number of 24 subs,China will have 4 times that nymber and together with pak's dozen or so modern subs,can saturate the IOR,making it very difficult for the IN to sanitise the ocean that bears India's name.A forward presenece in the ndo-China Sea will no doubt help,but it is not a solution.The IN requires at least 36 nuclear and conventional subs to deal with the Sino-Paki threat simultaneously.This requires at least 6 SSGNs apart from our dedicated SSBNs,plus 12-16 new AIP missile-firing subs to serve alongside legacy U-boats/Kilos that have been upgraded.

While I realize our sub fleet is far from optimal at this moment in time but since you've been on about the Sino-pak sub threat in IOR , you would know surely that the defence against a sword is a shield and not necessarily another sword. For countering a sub fleet in IOR we need more P8I, MKI in Carnic, ASW corvettes and AUV's.

jai · Post by **jai** » 13 Oct 2011 23:34

Nihat wrote:While I realize our sub fleet is far from optimal at this moment in time but since you've been on about the Sino-pak sub threat in IOR , you would know surely that the defence against a sword is a shield and not necessarily another sword. For countering a sub fleet in IOR we need more P8I, MKI in Carnic, ASW corvettes and AUV's.

MKI - Su 30 MKI ? What anti sub role will the SU 30's have ? How will there presence at karnik deter lizard subs ?

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 14 Oct 2011 05:05

Is this illusion or my eyes betarying, I see indian flag here......

http://radikal.ru/F/i018.radikal.ru/111 ... 7.jpg.html

nevin · Post by **nevin** » 14 Oct 2011 08:37

yes,your eyes were deceiving. its the russian naval flag and thats yasen class " Severodvinsk". the newest attack sub. nice photo though

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 14 Oct 2011 09:07

The ocean which bears our name, has 7 entry points from which a non Indian-Oceanic country can enter into this lake.

1) Suez Canal via Red Sea. An artifical or man made construct.
2) Cape of Good hope, i.e south Africa.
3) Mallaca straits, where our island chain A&N can block traffic.
4) The Sundra Strait between the Indonesian Islands of Java and Sumatra. Map showing the location of Strait
5) Timor Sea, between East timor and Australia. Location of Timor Sea
6) Southern Australia.
7) The southern Ocean, or the ocean which surrounds the Antartica.

Suez canal has a limitation that fully loaded super tankers cannot traverse through it. Added to this is the fact that Red Sea is narrow and has a even more narrower outlet in the Gulf of Aden. An ideal choke point if India were ever to decide to choke this flow.

A&N islands give us the lordship of Mallaca Straits. We can at any time chose to close this strait or monitor any movement whether over the water surface or under the water surface. For example imagine India decides to build a road cum rail link connecting the Andaman island chain with the Nicobar Island chain, what happens then.

The other access points are which India cannot choke, without entering into a conflict or elevated tensions with Indonesia or Australia or South Africa. The last two options, i.e. Southern Australia and the Southern Ocean, are too perilous and too long. PLAAN ships would have to come all the way down to Pantagonia, in Chile, go around the southern tip of Argentina and then enter the Indian Ocean via South Africa or Southern Ocean.
But that is the beauty of this setup. We need not choke it, we only need to monitor the under surface and over surface water transportation. So basically we need a mesh of Underwater Acoustic/Ultrasound/Passive Sensor Networks. This will have to be complemented by ships and PI8 type planes which carry out surveillance over these oceans. Once a potential hostile vessel has been detected, our naval or Coast Guard Assets can continuously monitor them.

There are two types of ownership. One is the hard one, in which we physically prevent access to the Ocean. This will not be feasible for India. Not because of the lack of our capability or will. Rather if we do this with Indian Ocean, somebody else can do the same with Western Pacific or Atlantic ocean. Our Ocean borne trade will simply collapse. Also to enforce this kind of ownership will cost us massive amount of money.
There is another kind of ownership not the hard variety but the soft one. In this type of over lordship, nothing can possibly happen without our consent. So yes it is not our ocean, but only in name. This is the type of ownership that we should aim for. This costs us less, financially to maintain and enforce.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 14 Oct 2011 11:01

cross posting from Keypubs forum. An IN Tu-142ME in Russia..being overhauled?

Tu-142ME with primer on

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 14 Oct 2011 11:22

Kartik wrote:cross posting from Keypubs forum. An IN Tu-142ME in Russia..being overhauled?

Tu-142ME with primer on

I just noticed the refuelling probe....

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Oct 2011 11:38

could be if ARK on tail == arakonnam.

it would be overhaul of existing kit, not upg which we rejected for cost reasons. they were demanding some $900 mil iirc.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 14 Oct 2011 11:47

Singha wrote:could be if ARK on tail == arakonnam.

it would be overhaul of existing kit, not upg which we rejected for cost reasons. they were demanding some $900 mil iirc.

From the BR page

"Interfax-AVN reported in September 2004, that the Taganrog Aviation Company (Tavia) was implementing a contract for the repair of a Tu-142ME aircraft of the Indian Navy. Tavia's Director General, Nikolai Savitskikh, stated, "Another Indian plane of this type is currently under repairs at the aircraft plant. According to the schedule, the enterprise must annually repair one Indian Tu-142ME." He also stated that the enterprise was only repairing the Indian aircraft, not upgrading them. "Eight Tu-142MEs were supplied to India in 1987-1988. They are repaired in turns, all of them have been repaired once and are now up for the second repairs," the Director General said. He also added that repairs of both Russian and Indian Tu-142 planes provide for most of the company's workload."

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 14 Oct 2011 14:06

ARK=Arakkonam...why do you think the P-8I has the same letters on their tail, hain ji?

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 14 Oct 2011 14:20

jai wrote:
Nihat wrote:While I realize our sub fleet is far from optimal at this moment in time but since you've been on about the Sino-pak sub threat in IOR , you would know surely that the defence against a sword is a shield and not necessarily another sword. For countering a sub fleet in IOR we need more P8I, MKI in Carnic, ASW corvettes and AUV's.
MKI - Su 30 MKI ? What anti sub role will the SU 30's have ? How will there presence at karnik deter lizard subs ?

MKI's with their range and payload (Brahmos !!) would make it very difficult for any hostile surface vessels to operate in the area leaving the subs to roam naked and nothing to protect them against our P8-I from the air and ASW corvettes on the sea surface.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Oct 2011 17:25

Nihat,if you study ASW warfare in the littorals you will find that for surface vesses detecting small conventional subs,that too AIP ones,the task is enormous.There are so many false returns on sonar and range and driection drastically reduces when tracking subs.It is why the best weapon to fight another sub is a sub itself.Apart from the well-known tasks of offensive ops,subs are the best platforms for intel surveillance.Subs also delivering special forces teams to recce enemy beaches-as was done in WW2 at Normandy,and is rampant in the NoKo SoKo spat.Such teams were used by the British during the Falklands War,some still classified ops,where SAS/SBS teams monitoring Argie airfields,provided intel on Argie fighter attacks to the RN and were also used as advance recce/sabotage teams for the final landings.Subs are the stealthiest weapon systems available and one cannot have enough of them!

Apart from tracking and dealing with enemy subs,their use as offensive weapons against enemy surface task forces and merchant convoys,is a pre-requisiite just as Doenitz's wolfpacks devastated Allied Atlantic shipping.We will also need subs to escort out carrier task forces too.US carrier task forces are supposedly always accompanied by an SSN which can sprint ahead to scour the seas for any underwater threats-in-waiting..

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Oct 2011 18:58

Kartik wrote:An IN Tu-142ME in Russia..being overhauled?

A certain percentage of the Tu-142MKE fleet is always undergoing routine overhaul. This is old technology and the birds put in significant hours of routine service. The 737 based commercial platform offers higher reliability and significantly lower maintenance requirements.

Note the MAD sting atop the tailfin. The reason it is placed there is so that the metal from aircraft airframe does not interfere with it.

Secondly, for K Rohit's quote, its routine maintenance and not "repair". Maybe the actual meaning was lost in translation.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 14 Oct 2011 21:32

K_Rohit wrote: From the BR page
"Interfax-AVN reported in September 2004, that the Taganrog Aviation Company (Tavia) was implementing a contract for the repair of a Tu-142ME aircraft of the Indian Navy. Tavia's Director General, Nikolai Savitskikh, stated, "Another Indian plane of this type is currently under repairs at the aircraft plant. According to the schedule, the enterprise must annually repair one Indian Tu-142ME." He also stated that the enterprise was only repairing the Indian aircraft, not upgrading them. "Eight Tu-142MEs were supplied to India in 1987-1988. They are repaired in turns, all of them have been repaired once and are now up for the second repairs," the Director General said. He also added that repairs of both Russian and Indian Tu-142 planes provide for most of the company's workload."

thanks for that quote from the BR page. Didn't think of looking there.