Project 75 & Submarine Options

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16548
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 27 Apr 2005 18:01

Igorr,

I see some sort of a battle going on for the non-nuclear subs for the IN.

Waht I would like to see is Russia getting the contracts for the nuclear wing and not the non-nuclear wing.

I have no problem with a non-nuclear sub from Germany + Russia tho'. In fact I would prefer that.

All this means, IMHO, No Amurs. RU supplies Akulas + tech support on ATVs.

Germany + Russia provide the 214/whatever. And, if France stops flusing all that wine, should provide the Scorps for a more reasonable price.

Sequence is imprtant.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 349
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ragupta » 27 Apr 2005 18:22

Igorr,
Thanks for the information on Akula.

Philip,
Agree 100%.

Regarding Scorpene I was under the impression that it was going to cost us $1.8B, all information in this regard, up to few months back only talked about this price range, and that is why I was hoping it could be signed in the last financial year.

But now the price being quoted is more than double this amount. So the offer of HDW is good at this time, but India Navy is losing precious time on this. Sad that we are in this situation. too bad.

I would rather buy A380 with that much amount and dump depth charges and air launched torpedos using this planes, at a single sign of Sub in India ocean, Bay of Bengal and Arabian sea. :)

I saw the inaugural flight of A380, very impressive plane!, that is what I would like to see in Indian colors. I hope Jetairways/Sahara go for it.
Last edited by ragupta on 27 Apr 2005 19:41, edited 1 time in total.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 27 Apr 2005 18:37

It's been a while since I've agreed with Philip :) but the delay in the Scorpene deal and the cut in CAPEX funds is bordering on criminal negligence. HDW's offer should not be entertained due to time considerations.

Furthermore, having the ability to fire Brahmos from subs is a nice feature but remember that just because Rubin slapped some plastic together to make model of an Amur to have an eight-cell Brahmos VLS doesn't mean that they are anywhere near an actual sub with those capabilities. I would also contend that Rubin would need an actual order from the IN and a down payment to even start the RDT&E process for the Brahmos equipped Amur. Then you're talking a very long lead time. Moral of the story, vaporware remains vaporware, even if a plastic model of the vaporware is shown.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1501
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 28 Apr 2005 00:40

Well brahmos is one of the most lethal ASCM in the whole world.

Spotting a carrier in the open ocean is a hectic job then what to talk about submarines and especially the ones that include stealth tech. Brahmos a great ASSCM + stealth submarine will be a great combination to make sure that our adversary [no matter whoever they are] think twice or thrice before they align their naval assets with evil intentions against india [ Note: Its well known that most naval surface vessels are for power projection purposes]. India has a huge coastline to defend against any intrusion and we cannot let 24 submairnes built in next 30 years remain devoid of launching the best ASSCM in our inventory.

Whether contract is given to HDW + russians or French or HDW we have to make sure that the ones that we build indigenously under ToT does have facility for Brahmos launch. If anyone of them can provide this facility in their original subs that will be a great plus. We just can't afford to build a whole submarine fleet over next 30 years which will servce us well into the first half of this century with not even single one of them having capability to fire Brahmos.

As far missiles like exocet are concerned, chinese can get a good peep into its working given that their dog TSP already has it. They will account for its capability into any Ship defence system they build. They are familiar with russian ASSCMs , so our most promising defence against them[their surface based naval assets] will be brahmos equipped stealth submarines. USA could also be very well aware of exocets.
Last edited by Sumeet on 28 Apr 2005 00:42, edited 1 time in total.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 28 Apr 2005 00:40

Once a decision is taken, we'll be locked on with that sub/country for next 30 years.

Which country/vendor would be able to survive the competition, provide us with better midlife upgrades, newer sensor technology and long-range weapons in next three decades?

Also which country will add most to the Indian geopolitical weight in world matter concerning Indian interest?

Which vendor/country is offering best counter offer for reverse investment in Indian economy?

These are three main questions that need to be answered before deciding on the submarine deal.

Guys,

IN would not be able to sign any deal this year, as there is no money after funding 2 ADS/Gorshky, a manufacturing line of destroyers and a line of frigates, host of other upgrades and small ship manufacturing projects. A supplementary budget grant is a pre-requisite for funding a new line of sub manufacturing IMHO.

rajivg
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby rajivg » 28 Apr 2005 01:44

The only consideration should be the reccommendation by the IN. The IN has said it should be the Scorpene and then why should the idiots in the defence and finance ministry second guess the navy's decision?

There will be no submarine deal this year because of the Rs.10,000 Cr. CAPEX cut, and I doubt it will ever come about with the UPA. The so-called intellectual Harvard PhD finance minister has really stabbed the country in the back and put the lives of many in danger. Maybe he's a more worse enemy than the Chicoms or TSP.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5193
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Postby Kartik » 28 Apr 2005 06:24

ragupta wrote: that is what I would like to see in Indian colors. I hope Jetairways/Sahara go for it.


and where could they fly such an aircraft ? our national carrier did'nt go for it and you're hoping that a private airline would buy it ?! as of now its difficult to get to the break-even load on some routes..

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 28 Apr 2005 07:14

rajivg wrote:The only consideration should be the reccommendation by the IN. The IN has said it should be the Scorpene and then why should the idiots in the defence and finance ministry second guess the navy's decision?

There will be no submarine deal this year because of the Rs.10,000 Cr. CAPEX cut, and I doubt it will ever come about with the UPA. The so-called intellectual Harvard PhD finance minister has really stabbed the country in the back and put the lives of many in danger. Maybe he's a more worse enemy than the Chicoms or TSP.


Dude it'll take you a few life time to learn and understand what PC does in a week. So stop makeing an a$$ out of your ignorant self and knock some sense in your brain.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 28 Apr 2005 08:11

Vick,the underwater "VLS missile complex" for firing Klub missiles from Kilos was designed over a decade ago.The same system ,with minor modifications can thus launch the Brahmos.In any case,the Brahmos is being developed for universal launch-land,sea and air and will be sooner rather than later found aboard an Indian sub.

However,there are some curious coincidences in recent times.The court clearance of any wrongdoing by HDW just before the cabinet met to confirm the decision to buy Scorpenes,which the Finance Minister objected to.The decision to buy Boeing aircraft for Air India made public (by the airline board only and not the GOI)24 hours before the flawless first flight of the A-380.Here one must add that the so-called Boeing "Dreamliner"actually has three rows of three seaters (3+3+3)in the cabin configuration,against the std. norm of 2+4+2.Imagine being stuck in the middle for a non-stop flight to the US in a Dreamliner,where 5 people have to cross over other passengers (that too two in the side rows) to go to the loo,unlike only 4 in Airbus aircraft.No dream but a nightmare instead! Curious times indeed.

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Postby Shankar » 28 Apr 2005 10:28

Philip -times are very odd indeed - i was really surprised to see air india finalisisng on boeing 777 and 787 so suddenly though ithe decision was in the pipeline for quite long. A-380 was literally not given a fair chance. Now the problem with clearence of scorpenes -looks like anti french lobby is really active -i wont be surprised if mirage 2000 5 are also pushed out and f-16 s brought in some indications are there . Visit of M/s cr really did shake up our defense purchase options .

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1501
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 28 Apr 2005 11:36

Philip wrote:Vick,the underwater "VLS missile complex" for firing Klub missiles from Kilos was designed over a decade ago.The same system ,with minor modifications can thus launch the Brahmos.In any case,the Brahmos is being developed for universal launch-land,sea and air and will be sooner rather than later found aboard an Indian sub.



Philip any idea if Scorpene can be modified to fit in brahmos ? In my opinion indian stealth submarines should have capability to fire Brahmos ASSCM.

Scorpene has 21 inches torpedo tubes(around .5meters) the Brahmos/Yakhont is +.7meters in diameter, so when we make scorpene indigenously can we increase the tube parameters to suit brahmos ?

Also here is something interesting:

http://www.dcn.fr/us/produits/interface.html#8

Submarine Air Defence,

DCN is developing an air defence concept for submarines.

The system is based on sea-proven technologies and missiles fired from the submarine's torpedo launch tubes.

The system, comprising its own sensors and combat subsystem, enables a submerged submarine to detect and attack ASW helicopters (whether hovering or patrolling) and maritime patrol aircraft.

The concept represents a cost-effective deterrent against airborne ASW resources.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 349
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ragupta » 28 Apr 2005 18:03

Kartik wrote:
ragupta wrote: that is what I would like to see in Indian colors. I hope Jetairways/Sahara go for it.


and where could they fly such an aircraft ? our national carrier did'nt go for it and you're hoping that a private airline would buy it ?! as of now its difficult to get to the break-even load on some routes..


Both JetAirways and Sahara are going international. Jet is starting flights to London in May and NY in June. Sahara is soon to follow.

Since AI/IA have already selected planes Boeing/Airbus, I do not expect them to go for A-380 anytime soon.

So the only option is private carriers. About airport they are being/will be soon modernized to handle A-380 class. Hyderabad will be, Bangalore I am hoping will be too. Delhi/Mumbai modernization will soon take care of it.

Lets not have this disscussion here, comment on this in Eco forum and I will reply there.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 28 Apr 2005 18:15

We should have gone in for A-380s, signed a MoU with the French to develop a maritime patrol aircraft based on the A-319 platform, signed the order for M2K-9s (60 M2K-9s and 66 MiG-29M2s) and ordered 8 Scorpenes. Stay away from anything American. I respectfully disagree with the UPA Government and her policies. This is how we repay the French after her support for our Shakti-98 nuclear tests. Mera Bharat Mahan!

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 28 Apr 2005 18:25

The US is the big dawg... the only big dawg, if India intentionally chooses not to engage the US, India could let a lot of opportunities in varied areas slip away. US equipment could be a liability from the sanctions POV but if that's the only POV one is looking at then one should broaden the FOV. IMO. Having a working relationship with the US, which means giving and taking, could be very beneficial for India but if India consistantly tries to shy away from the US then don't be too surprised to see the US not taking into account India's POVs or India's concerns.

Laks
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 11 Jan 2005 20:47

Postby Laks » 28 Apr 2005 18:29

I am neither going to link civil aircraft purchases with military ones nor take sides wrt Airbus/Boeing.

AFAIK, the 380 is really suited for a hub-and-spoke model. That's why you see airlines with large hubs (Emirates, SIA and some EU airlines) want to benefit from this. Do you think India can serve as a regional hub (for e.g., we let TSP, BD, SL citizens transit thru our hubs to their final destination)?

With the AI purchase, we'll have more direct connections from various Indian cities (not only DEL/BOM, but also BLR, HYD,MAA) to various EU/US cities. We can continue in the civil aviation thread.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 28 Apr 2005 18:31

Vick, when has the US ever looked at our POV? They only see Pakistan's POV when one talks of South Asia. So let them.

Laks, will meet you in the Civil Aviation Discussion thread...just as note though, if not A-380....Airbus has an entire fleet of aircraft that can serve Air India's needs. Boeing is not needed nor necessary.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 28 Apr 2005 18:42

Rakesh wrote:Vick, when has the US ever looked at our POV? They only see Pakistan's POV when one talks of South Asia. So let them.


The US had no pressing need to approve the Phalcon deal. Actually, the US doesn't even need to even offer India F-16/18 as a offset to the pak F-16. The US could have just bulldozed the paki F-16s through and not even batted an eyelid at Indian concerns. The US is taking Indian concerns into account but also offering the PAC-2. The PAC-2 is a capable SAM system, maybe not an ABM but as a SAM it is extremely capable. After all, the PAC-2 has shot down an F-16 and a Tornado. Now what other SAM can claim to have done that :)

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 28 Apr 2005 18:53

Vick, the only reason the US is offering F-16s/F-18s to India is because they want to milk India, just as they are doing to the Pukes. Their reason to sell us jet fighters is purely a business reason and all this talk about we-want-to-make-you-into-a-superpower is just a whole load of cow dung! The only reason they are selling PAC-2 to India is because DRDO is now coming up with a comparable variant. The reasoning behind this is also make a few dollars and kill the indigenous program. This is turn results in India being dependent on them on a vital piece of equipment - ABM defences. We already have the Green Pine radar from Israel. The US has done us no big favour by giving IAI the greenlight to sell us the Phalcon. Their State Department (aka Pakistan State Department) is still vehemently opposed to the sale, and they are pulling all strings to scuttle the PAC-2 deal.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Postby merlin » 28 Apr 2005 18:54

>>The US could have just bulldozed the paki F-16s through and not even batted an eyelid at Indian concerns. The US is taking Indian concerns into account but also offering the PAC-2.

OK, where do you see the US taking Indian concerns into account here? I fail to see it.

Offering us F-whatever is not taking Indian concerns into account, its plain business. $4 billion dollars (or whatever is the current value of purchases IAF is looking at) is nothing to sneeze at.

Let the US offer PAC-3 and then we shall see. Engagement has to be a two way street, not the US style my-way-or-the-highway.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16548
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Apr 2005 19:02

Rakesh,

IMHO, there is some diff between GOTUS and American industry.

What you say is not wrong, but one could make an argument to harness American industry to influence GOTUS policies.

Something one needs to consider. Also, the landscape, as compared to even 3-4 years, has changed. India does hold a bigger stick.

I feel if Indians (Politicians/Babus/whatever) can get their act together, India can do anything they pretty much please. The biggest problem is that we are not united within.

Also, one more thought, it is crucial for India to think in terms of MKIizng and projecting that to all vendors. There is tremendous benefits in this - IMHO. Wgat this means is that we have to think in terms beyond Shakti, etc.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 28 Apr 2005 19:16

If the F-whatever deal is purely business why offer it now? Why not earlier? If it's purely a business deal, then wouldn't it make sense to buy from the Americans because, being as business savvy as they are, why would they put sanctions on India when without sanctions, the US could make even more money in India. Now, wouldn't that make more business sense? Whe be afraid of sanctions if the US is only out to make a buck? And everyone knows, Boeing and LM can't make a buck if there are sanctions in place.

A quick anecdote: Why do you think the Chinese are eager for EU to lift the sanctions? The Chinese could just say, screw you EU, we will only buy from the Russians, that would treat you right for sanctioning us. Why not? The EU has shown themselves to be unreliable by sanctioning them for over a decade.

They know that they can't have influence if they choose to disengage. The Chinese bought a bunch of Blackhawk helos from the US before the sanctions and I'm willing to bet that if the US lifted the sanctions, the Chinese would again buy mil gear from the US. Why? Again, they can't influence the Americans if they don't engage them. How often have we complained that Indian influence in SD and DoD is negligible? Why is that? Part of the problem is exactly because India hasn't been willing to engage. If the Boeing deal goes through, do you think India will have more or less influence in SD and DoD?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 28 Apr 2005 19:44

NRao: Shakti-98 was one of the most pivotal moments in India's history. The Russians and the French - to name a couple – were the only countries to have supported us after the tests. Let's see what our 'new-found-friends-in-America' did --> stopped work on the LCA project, imposed sanctions on us, supports a puppet dictatorship in Pak, gives Pak Non-NATO status or whatever its called, supplies F-16s to Pak knowing fully well they will be used as nuclear delivery platforms, encourages and coerces India to have a dialogue with the Pakistan Govt who only mandate is to further terrorism in India…the list goes on and on. The US does not negotiate with terrorists, but we are supposed to have a dialogue with TSP? The Americans MUST play on a level playing field with India. They MUST learn to play a game in which the rules are fair for both sides. We are not a pariah nation like the Pukes and we certainly don't need their help in becoming a superpower! With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Secondly, American industry cannot guarantee the mood swings of the GOTUS. They have gone on record saying that even if there are clauses in the agreements to ensure an uninterrupted supply of spares, the US Senate can reverse it at anytime. Their Senate can even repeal their own previous rulings, such as the Pressler Amendment. Yes India can do anything they please if we get our act together, but alas recent events prove otherwise.

Vick: The EU has imposed sanctions on China because of their deplorable human rights record. We are not in the same boat as them. When was the last time the French or the Russians imposed sanctions on us?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5193
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Postby Kartik » 28 Apr 2005 19:53

well said Rakesh.. :)

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 28 Apr 2005 20:52

Rakesh wrote:Vick: The EU has imposed sanctions on China because of their deplorable human rights record. We are not in the same boat as them. When was the last time the French or the Russians imposed sanctions on us?


The point isn't why sanctions were/are imposed the point is that even with sanctions imposed the Chinese are willing buy boat loads of arms from EU, perhaps even the boats themselves. Because the Chinese understand that it's influence that matters.

If one wants to avoid doing business with the US due to the revenge motive, then there's no point in discuss the issue because revenge motive is purely an emotional response. Statecraft requires logical thought and discussion.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16548
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Apr 2005 22:43

Rakesh,

IMVVVHO, what Uncle did then is in the past. Current dynamics does not allow Uncle to play any pranks. If fact, the F-18 is no offer IMHO. Poor Uncle has no choice. I have posted various reasons for some time now, so I will not retype all that. In short the regional dynamics have changed enough to make Uncle change his mind for some time to come - and the best aprt is that he has really no choice but to part with pretty much what India wants.

((This does not mean that India can get what they want. As we have seen in the very recent past, RUians have started acting up when India wants something from elsewhere. So, even IF Uncle offers - say civilian nuke plants, India may not be able to get them because of other dynamics.

India, in that regard is still a wee bit raw to fend off such situations.))

While we are accounting,who did what, when, we should account for a few top-of-the-line subs that our beloved friends from across the border got from the French. So offence.

BTW, Chicom, it is said, is hoping to get a couple of Aircraft acrriers from France - if and when the emargo is lifted. Not to mention the MKKs, etc they have got from RUians. Just accounting, not complaining.

So, the wheel turns. My point being that you can hold on to old thoughts or look ahead and make thing shappen. Just heard that experts expect India to be on the fore-front in economics by 2030/40. You want to plan for then, you better start now. I have done such planning work - thus my talk. My advice would be to bury the bad Shakti experiences and hang on to the good ones. IMVVVHO, India, today, is in a position to demand - not request. Just that we are not used to demanding - because of old thinking and memories (which I agree are diff to get rid of).

Just some thoughts.

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Roop » 29 Apr 2005 07:23

Rakesh:

You seem to be thinking we could either be pro-American all the way (and screw the Russians/French) or the opposite extreme (pro-Russian/French all the way and screw the Americans). I see no need for such an all-or-nothing approach. As I said in the other thread, the right balance is to give America a lot of our commercial trade, and Russia/France/Israel a lot of our military trade.

Therefore, I see this Boeing deal as a good decision on the commercial side, and I think a Mig-29/Mirage-2000 decision on the MRCA would be good on the military side. (Actually, I have fantasies of Rafale, but I don't often speak about them in public 8) ).

P.S. I am also strongly pro-Scorpene. :)

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2376
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Postby John » 29 Apr 2005 07:33

BTW, Chicom, it is said, is hoping to get a couple of Aircraft acrriers from France - if and when the emargo is lifted. Not to mention the MKKs, etc they have got from RUians. Just accounting, not complaining.

i doubt it because PLAN still doesnt have assests to protect it and wont have any time soon. Because any carrier chicoms build will be bottom of sea if confrontation were to escalate between china and roc or japan or korea or unkil, why? because carriers are rather vunerable while they are docked.

And unlike IN which has luxury of being subcontinent chinese SYs are very close to its rivals. Not to mention only threat we face is couple of rusting tsp Mirage-IIIs, F-16As. i remember how IN got fits when Pakistan procured 2 P-3 orion (while japan happens to operates 100 of them).


That said getting back to topic P-75 program is rather important for IN since our subs are not only important in huntingdown agosta's and chinese SSKs. They are also vital to protecting the shipping lanes in the south pacific subs are the only we can achieve since IN surface fleet still lacks the ability to operate without with air cover from the IAF.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 30 Apr 2005 20:40

NRao wrote:While we are accounting,who did what, when, we should account for a few top-of-the-line subs that our beloved friends from across the border got from the French. So offence. BTW, Chicom, it is said, is hoping to get a couple of Aircraft acrriers from France - if and when the emargo is lifted. Not to mention the MKKs, etc they have got from RUians. Just accounting, not complaining.


Well the Russians sold Mi-17s to the Pukes as well. Does that mean India should not deal with Russia anymore? What the Pukes purchase from whom is irrelevant. My beef is not about their precious Block 52 F-16s or their MESMA-equipped Agosta 90Bs or the MKKs the Chicoms have got, but rather its with the double standard the US deals with India and Pakistan. The Pukes get a free reign to do quite frankly whatever they want in Kashmir and the US has done nothing about it. George Bush goes around toting that if you harbour a terrorist, you are a terrorist yourself. Isn't that what has Pakistan been doing for all these years? Sitting at Capital Hill and preaching that Pakistan must stop cross border terrorism is a lot different than forcing Pakistan to shut down all its terrorist camps. The US is dead against nuclear proliferation to North Korea and Iran....but wait....let's see now....was'nt it Abdul 'Queer' Khan who sold nuclear secrets in exchange for missiles and other related equipment for his country? But in the US State Department's eyes Pakistan is sacroscant and must be rewarded for they dastardly acts they commit. Let's give them F-16s, lets give them Non-NATO status...hey after all they only supplied nuclear secrets to Iran and North Korea, who might one day just launch nuclear missiles at us! Hmmmm???? :roll:

What happened at 9/11 was terrible and the US went after the terrorists and rightfully so. But India faces the brunt of terrorism too! Our Parliament - our very visible face of democracy - was attacked by vermin who are supported on every possible front by Pukestan. But we are told by Uncle to have a dialogue with that terrorist nation. You guys have nukes, you guys are unstable, a dialogue is better. And now the Pukes ernestly believe that India backed down at Parakram because of their 'Chinese' nukes! Do you not see a contradiction here? Is India not entitled to protect her freedom, her people just as the US is? Are we supposed to continue to send our officers and jawans to die in Kashmir, while the US forces us to continue a dialogue with Pukestan?

NRao wrote:So, the wheel turns. My point being that you can hold on to old thoughts or look ahead and make things happen. My advice would be to bury the bad Shakti experiences and hang on to the good ones. Just that we are not used to demanding - because of old thinking and memories (which I agree are diff to get rid of).


I am all for looking forward and making things happen. But what India does not need is a patronizing Uncle telling us how we cannot do anything without their help and they are truly ernest in making us into a superpower. I too want a co-operative, constructive relationship with the US. But not at the expense of compromising the national interests of India. I have this uncanny feeling (which makes me sick to my stomach) that all this bonhomie with the US is going to result is us getting F-16s/F-18s. If yo u say that we are in a position to demand, is there any reason why the US wants to offload P-3Bs on to us when we have been asking for P-3Cs?
Last edited by Rakesh on 01 May 2005 01:29, edited 1 time in total.

viveks
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 17 Nov 2004 06:01

Postby viveks » 30 Apr 2005 23:34

Arre.....dont talk like this yaar. Basically our politicians are not strong characters to indicate something to the world that we mean business.
Once a leader stands up........everyone has to listen....if they dont listen......it is up to them to take their stand.

Can you imagine.....when 911 took place, uncle only make one statement to pak....which changed the entire image of the game....."either you are with us or you are against us".

I think the real thing to tackling the problem with pak is to strengthen education and encourage liberalism.....only then will something change.

There are otherways to look at matters, as explained below:

I think giving the form of offensive millitary aid to pakistan is not justified. There are other form of business opportunities that the us arms industry can do business with the pakis, besides, giving them offensive weapons. If they are given defensive weapons rather than offensive ones, then there will be no war in the sub-continent at all.

The thing what I think is....arming pakistan again is for strenghtening the political establishment within pakistan in regards to threats from the fundamentalists and strenghtening musharaf's image. Arre....some one once mentioned that you get an Ak-47 weapon in peshawar for Rs. 5000 (pak rupees)....thats just over a hundred $100.

Also, it might be that the us arms industry needs growth and more orders coming. Here is another example of how politics influences business in both sides.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 093795.cms

In my assessment, I think this deal is clicked because to ensure that pak does not get the F-16 it wants.

And if I am right then our politicians know what they are doing with out creating noise.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 01 May 2005 05:20

I don't think buying and selling decision depends on anyone’s discretion of these subjective matters. Arms purchases are governed by well laid out process and laws of the land. Unless one has logical reasons (like previous history of sanction or law fully blacklisted company etc) it would be cognizable offence to favor one country/vendor over others.

We are not citizen of Pakistan or other authoritative country where a ruler or a junta would take these subjective things in considerations based on ruler's personal rapport with other leaders/countries before executing deals.

If law doesn’t forbid it everyone is qualified to bid and who ever meets GSQR at lowest cost wins the deal.

Global tendering is the best way to go IMHO.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3277
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 01 May 2005 06:16

Vick wrote:The US is the big dawg... the only big dawg, if India intentionally chooses not to engage the US, India could let a lot of opportunities in varied areas slip away. US equipment could be a liability from the sanctions POV but if that's the only POV one is looking at then one should broaden the FOV. IMO. Having a working relationship with the US, which means giving and taking, could be very beneficial for India but if India consistantly tries to shy away from the US then don't be too surprised to see the US not taking into account India's POVs or India's concerns.


What makes you think that India is not 'engaging' the U.S.? We are doing quite a lot of business (both ways) in the civilian area. After all, it is not everyday that Boeing gets a $6B order. What Rakesh is saying is that we heve to be careful, based on past experience, in becoming dependent on the U.S. for military supplies. Why do you think that prudent caution in military procurement by India will antagonize the U.S. esp. when there is so much civilian business going on?

The military-industrial complex does have influence on GOTUS policy, but the civilian-industrial complex does not lack influence either. China has successfully exploited its links with the civilian U.S. business.

I agree with Rakesh that we need to be very selective in buying weaponry from the U.S. Our main foreign suppliers have to be France, Russia, and Israel.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3277
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 01 May 2005 06:21

Vick wrote:The US is taking Indian concerns into account but also offering the PAC-2. The PAC-2 is a capable SAM system, maybe not an ABM but as a SAM it is extremely capable. After all, the PAC-2 has shot down an F-16 and a Tornado. Now what other SAM can claim to have done that :)


Yes, and if India buys the PAC-2, it will "successfully" shoot down the LCA and the SU-30MKI. :lol:

Sorry, Vick. I couldn't resist.

Ben
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 1
Joined: 12 Apr 2005 17:12

Postby Ben » 02 May 2005 17:15

Hello,

All your comments on this forum are really interesting and very well provided with information.
I agree with most of you to say that american are trying to kill some indian home made programs. They did it in Europe, and we haven't been able to coordinate all european countries to make together our own programs. Nows countries like Poland, Italy, Norway, England or Portugal are financing many american military programs. The other countries are short of money to finance independant programs.
Don't do the same mistake that we did. You will lose a lot of technology, money and most of all, independance.
I don't know if Scorpene is better than HDW, this will be your choice. But do it fast...and clearly ! It's the same for the 126 fighters and all the programs that everyone is talking about. Don't trust too much americans, they have betrayed in a way or another almost all their "allies".
By, the way, could anyone explain to me how your decision system works in terms of military aquisition ? I see it from France, and I find it really hard to understand !
Thank you,
Ben.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Postby Rakesh » 02 May 2005 22:56

Rakesh wrote:The US is dead against nuclear proliferation to North Korea and Iran....but wait....let's see now....was'nt it Abdul 'Queer' Khan who sold nuclear secrets in exchange for missiles and other related equipment for his country? But in the US State Department's eyes Pakistan is sacroscant and must be rewarded for they dastardly acts they commit. Let's give them F-16s, lets give them Non-NATO status...hey after all they only supplied nuclear secrets to Iran and North Korea, who might one day just launch nuclear missiles at us! Hmmmm???? :roll:


North Korea capable of firing nuclear-armed missile at US: US DIA official

I guess the US State Department's shenanigans have finally caught up to bite them in the....well you know where! A very apt link for the discussion we are having. Why stop at Block 52 F-16s...give them MIRV capability, nuclear warhead designs, even nuclear weapons...make them even more unstable than they already are!

rajivg
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby rajivg » 03 May 2005 00:38

Dude it'll take you a few life time to learn and understand what PC does in a week. So stop makeing an a$$ out of your ignorant self and knock some sense in your brain.



Katare,


My opinions of the FM are based on his previous term and his record so far this term. The idea of imposing CVD, fringe benefit tax and withdrawal tax smacks of incompetence.

Further, making personal attacks against forum members is against policy, iff the admins wish to enforce it. I would advise you to desist and apologize to me.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 03 May 2005 01:27

Ben wrote:Hello,

All your comments on this forum are really interesting and very well provided with information.
I agree with most of you to say that american are trying to kill some indian home made programs. They did it in Europe, and we haven't been able to coordinate all european countries to make together our own programs. Nows countries like Poland, Italy, Norway, England or Portugal are financing many american military programs. The other countries are short of money to finance independant programs.
Don't do the same mistake that we did. You will lose a lot of technology, money and most of all, independance.
I don't know if Scorpene is better than HDW, this will be your choice. But do it fast...and clearly ! It's the same for the 126 fighters and all the programs that everyone is talking about. Don't trust too much americans, they have betrayed in a way or another almost all their "allies".
By, the way, could anyone explain to me how your decision system works in terms of military aquisition ? I see it from France, and I find it really hard to understand !
Thank you,
Ben.


Ben,

Welcome to BRF!

India wishes to indigenize its acquisition, but this attempt has been hampered by lack of long term planning and funds shortages. This leads to situations where India rushes to buy something, having not paid heed to developing it locally. But now, India does have competency in designing and manufacturing radars, EW, sonars, C3I, Missiles and other essential areas. AVionics is another area where India has done Ok.
The acquisition system is held hostage to special interest groups as well, namely lobbyists and corrupt middlemen.
Having said that, there has been some progress in getting something workable. But as a whole, the Indian MOD has no value for time. And that is exacerbated by the politicians currently ruling India, who dont appear to be interested in changing things.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 05 May 2005 22:39

Somebody spoke here some time before about a possibility for anti-aircraft missiles equipment for French submarines. The Russian subs (improved Kilo) already have 'Strela' missiles. Look here: http://warfare.ru/?catid=307&linkid=1758
Kilo class:
http://warfare.ru/0702ey70/update/jan2005/5/636-0.jpg
Armament: SS-N-27 Club / P-900 Alfa
8 Strela-3 (SA-N-8 Gremlin) or
8 Igla (SA-N-10 Gimlet)
6/533 mm Torpedoe Tubes
18 VA-111 (w: c/nucl) Torpedoes or
24 mines

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 05 May 2005 23:04

Some article about the Lada/Amur subs.

The oceans await our "Lada"
Vladimir GUNDAROV, the "Red Star".

Already during October at the plant "admiralty shipyards" in the northern capital will pass the solemn ceremony of descent to the water of a new Russian diesel-electric submarine (SSK)"Saint Petersburg" of project 677 "Lada". On this reported the design project leader OF TSKB MT. "Rubin" Igor Spasskiy, association of which developed the design of this submarine.

"Saint Petersburg" - the first submarine is not only of a new project. It opens the line SSK of the fourth generation. Its generation, in the essence, breakthrough in the technical and economic characteristics and technology. In it are realized more than hundred new scientific and design solutions. Radio-electronic armament, boat equipment and materials - last word of science and technology. In the opinion of the creators of submarine, it is the pilot project of all SSK, which will be constructed in the new century.

Basic difference in the energy-armament of submarine - the so-called"hydrogen small batteries". This is main power plant (GEU) of the locked type, because of which in comparison with the traditional storage batteriesof diesel-electric submarines several times is increased theindependence.

However, Russian designers thirty a (!) years ago proposed GEU with the electrochemical generator (EKHG). Hydrogen and oxygen were used as the fuel cells in it. The submarine S -273 of project 613 they re-equipped on to project 6133 "Katran". If usual boats at binodal speed without the booster charge could befound under water not more than four days, that with the use EKHG period increased to the month. The creation of diesels became the second direction in the designdevelopments, working on the closed cycle. Project 615 (Quebec) with the united engine, personified in the metal even in the middle of past century, it became unique in entire peace. But because of the frequent fires this submarine submariners themselves called it "cigarette lighter".

The project originators of "Saint Petersburg" guarantee, what safety of operation by their GEU - by an order is higher. Head developer of propulsive systems with EKHG - special design bureauof boiler construction. Drawing on experience of Ural electrochemical combine and NPO "energy"on the creation EKHG for the automatic spacecraft, SKB developed engine for the submarines "crystal -20", in which is used oxygen and hydrogen.

New submarine possesses tactical-technical elements, which, on the assertion of draftees, they will allow into two, and that three times to exceed on the combat effectiveness of thesubmarine of the third generation. New construction distinguishes the high degree of the automation ofthe processes of centralized control of all boat systems and weaponfrom the operator panels, located in primary command post. The power of rocket- torpedo complex is increased. "Saint Petersburg" they will arm with new antiship missile complex KLUB- S with the new automated information system for control ofweapon. New inertial navigation complex will be established. Hydroacoustic complex is also built on the new element base and withthe newest software. In the nose extremity highly sensitive hydrophone antenna is placed. Fundamentally new universal multifunctional periscope is established, not penetrating into the durable housing. Is inculcated the new system of the method of radio-information fromthe coast in the underwater position.

The level of underwater noise is reduced by more than 30 decibels, and the level of the radiated acoustic power - is more than into thousands of times! Thus, the noisiness of new boat will be practically approximating the background values of sea. Consequently, on the reticence it must exceed all submarines, built thus far not only, but also somewhere abroad.

Tactical-technical elements of the submarine of project 677 of"harmony"

Quantity of torpedo tubes, unit. - 6.
Above-water (normal) the water-ism
shcheniye, me - 2.350.
Length, m - 73.8.
Width (diameter of durable housing), m - 9.9.
Speed of complete underwater running, knots. - 20.
Distance of underwater floating with the economic speed, miles - 400.
Crew, man. - 52.
(tactical-technical elements of submarine they are undertaken from the official site FGUP "admiralty shipyards").

Amur's VLS : Onyx/Brahmos launch
Image

AIP on Amur sub.:
http://www.mipagina.cantv.net/heeroyui5/amurfinal.jpg

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 05 May 2005 23:19

More one article about the technics of the silence for russian subs:

c) Vladimir GUNDAROV, Captain 1st Rank

[..]
Project 677 Lada continues the line of 636s and 877s (Kilo, according to NATO classification), which for their low noise levels were dubbed in the West as the "Black Hole"). We can be proud of our new achievements, because basic performances of Sankt Peterburg are two to three times better than those of third-generation boats in combat efficiency.
The new submarine belongs to the fourth generation and features a number of fundamental differences. Above all, it is the high degree of automation of centralized control of all shipboard systems and weapons from operator's consoles located in the main control room. The torpedo and missile system was made more powerful. Design offices, research and production associations and scientific research institutes have all contributed to that. Among them are CDB ME Rubin, NPO Avrora, FGUP TsNII Elektropribor, OKB Novator, and NPO Agat. A result of their joint efforts is the CLUB-S. It is an integrated missile system which represents a unique development that is in fact unmatched by anything else in the world.
Russian scientists, designers and builders have in fact made a breakthrough in technical and economic characteristics and technology in the Lada class. Dozens of new solutions were proposed in the course of research and development. All armaments, boat systems and materials are the last word in science and technology. The sonar system, for example, is built around the latest microchips and with the latest software. Located in the forward end is a highly sensitive sonar array. A fundamentally new all-purpose multi-functional periscope is installed. The hoisting mast devices are telescopic. They do not enter the pressure hull, with the exception of the attack periscope. A new system for receiving radio information from the shore in the submerged position has been introduced.
[..]
The Achilles' heel of all our submarines, with the exception of the Kilo-class submarine and the Project 971 nuclear-powered submarine, has been their high underwater noise levels. Between 1968 and 1986, the CPSU Central Committee and the USSR Council of Ministers issued four (!) decisions on this problem. Every six years it was requested to reduce the noise level by 50 or 70 per cent. All of these instructions were fulfilled, except for the last one when work on this theme was halted because of lack of financing. Lastly, the nuclear-powered multi-purpose submarines of Project 971A managed to reduce the underwater noise level by 30 decibels, or in noise pressure terms by 96.7 per cent, and in irradiated sound power terms, by a thousand times!
Last month, one of these submarines — K-157 Vepr — demonstrated its soft catlike movement during an official visit to the French port of Brest.
But Sankt Peterburg is not for nothing described as the successor to the "Black Hole". Its noise level is approaching sea background values. And in concealment it will surpass all submarines built earlier not only in this country but also abroad.
How could this be achieved? The answer was given at a state scientific centre called the Krylov Shipbuilding Research Institute (KSRI). Fourth-generation submarines are provided with specially developed noise-absorbing — down to low frequencies — rubber coatings only 40 mm thick. They are half as thick as those we used before. The new coating consists of 7 to 8 layers of rubber with different perforations and profiles. The idea is simple: the more air cavities there are, the more effectively they absorb noise of different frequencies and at different depths. This was said by Professor Ernst Myshinsky, Doctor of Engineering, head of the shipboard and industrial acoustics department.
But hydro-acoustic coating is only a passive defense against noise. And the Institute is already working on new tools for active defense. According to the scientist, development of such means of noise suppression is a super new direction in world science. In Russia the active methods appeared a quarter of a century ago, but then they were considered to be a "medicine", like nitroglycerin.
"Twenty-five years ago electronics was appalling. And we all feared that instead of creating an anti-sound — a sound in the anti-phase — we could knock out electronic controls. And the noise, on the contrary, would intensify," says Myshinsky. "But now electronics are normal, and so it is time to develop active comprehensive system of noise reduction."
It is possible that they may appear on the next submarine, which will be built after Sankt Peterburg.
[..]
Better Than Energiser
Stale TV advertising about batteries "that will work, work and work" would look deflated if developers of "hydrogen batteries" for the Sankt Peterburg boat dared to put their ware on the air waves.
Thirty years ago TsKB Lazurit, NPO Kvant and Kriogenmash embarked on the development for submarines of propulsive systems with electro-chemical generators, ECGs. The S-273 submarine of Project 613, which was mentioned above, was converted under Project 613E Katran. While conventional submarines at two-knot speeds could not stay under water for longer than four days without battery recharging, the use of electro-chemical generators increased this period to a month.
A second area in which Russian designers work is development of Diesels operating in a closed cycle. Project 615 with a single engine was put into metal in the middle of the last century and marked a unique event in the world.
Since 1978, the Special Boiler-Building Design Office has been the leading developer of propulsive systems with ECGs It drew on the experience of the Urals electrochemical works and NPO Energia that developed ECGs for spacecraft. In that way, a Kristall-20 engine for submarines made its appearance, using oxygen and hydrogen. The latter is present in bound form — in an intermetallic compound. Second-generation Kristall-27 and Kristall-273 engines can now also be installed on new Diesel-electric submarines, increasing their endurance to 45 days. Without divulging all secrets of Russian shipbuilding, we may say that the endurance of Sankt Peterburg is exactly 45 days.

Amur, Cousin of Lada
Just like the German Howaldtswerke Deutsche Werft AG, Admiralteiskiye Verfi, in parallel with the Lada class sub for the Russian Navy, is also building for export a fourth-generation submarine of Amur-1650 class. They are almost look-alikes. Amur will be able to fire missile salvoes against surface single and group targets. Compared with submarines of the previous projects, its acoustic signature is several times lower. It also carries radioelectronic equipment of a new generation.
Automatic ship control, and management of its combat and technical systems, will be effected from the main control room. An inertia navigation system will ensure safe navigation and determination of movement parameters while staying under water for a long time with an accuracy sufficient for missile weapons. Amur will have an all-mode propulsion electric motor of a new type, and also a storage battery with an extended service life.
Like Lada, the export unit is equipped with a highly sensitive array of the Lira sonar system. The outer hull is covered in Molniya anti-sonar coating of a new generation.
FGUP Admiralteiskiye Verfi is contributing financing to the development of an air-independent propulsion unit for use as an alternative source of electricity.

Everything for Sale
Admiralteiskiye Verfi has what financiers describe as a good credit history. By 2002, it had handed over to foreign clients thirteen submarines of Projects 877EKM and 636, i.e. more than half of boats of this class built in this country. At the same time, it repaired four vessels.
New output of the enterprise will also find its consumers. The most promising market, according to specialists, is South East Asia. Among the probable buyers of Amur-class submarines are Vietnam, Thailand, and the Philippines. Last century Russia sold about 50 submarines. It is not ruled out that in the 21st century products of Russian shipwrights will still be in demand on the international arms market.

http://www.rfforces.com/russian_militar ... sc-20.html

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 05 May 2005 23:33

ST. PETERSBURG, APRIL 8, - The Admiralteyskiye Verfi ship-yard is to conduct the St. Petersburg fourth-generation non-nuclear submarine's trial run late this May.

Talking to RIA Novosti here today, people at the ship-yard's press center noted that mooring tests would be completed by that time. Such tests involve the ship-yard's specialists, as well as those from the Rubin naval design bureau (that had developed the submarine).

The Russian Navy will receive the St. Petersburg submarine in late 2005, that is, after all tests are completed. This submarine's keel was laid in 1997.

The new submarine's improved specifications will make it possible to effectively hit underwater and surface targets alike. She will also launch missile salvos. The submarine features new-generation radio-electronic equipment replete with a modern elements base, a permanent-magnet electric propulsion unit (that can operate in just about any mode), as well as a storage battery with an extended service life.

Noise levels have been reduced several times over. The submarine hull also features a new and effective anti-sonar coating. She boasts a comprehensive automated-control system for her weaponry and technical systems, too.

The submarine's sonar complex features a highly sensitive sound locator in the bow section. The sound locator's area exceeds that of previous-generation subs' sound locators several-fold. The navigation complex ensures navigation safety, also making it possible to launch cruise missiles, while the submarine remains underwater for a long time. All retractable systems, except the commander's periscope, do not penetrate the submarine's pressure hull.

Peter the Great had established Admiralteiskye Verfi, which is Russia's oldest ship-yard, November 5, 1704. As of today, this enterprise designs, produces and upgrades civilian ships and warships, too. It has built more than 2,600 ships over the last 300 years.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest