Indian Naval Discussion

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Aug 2013 18:46

Because MDL vetoed pvt. yards for building the follow on second line,despite their bungling and delays over Scorpene production.They don't want competition.Russian sub bureaus have reportedly visited Pipapav and L&T earlier for JVs.Pipapav's facilities are good,but they don't have the skilled and experienced manpower that L&T does.

arijitkm · Post by **arijitkm** » 27 Aug 2013 10:55

Indian Navy’s dubious safety record worrisome for national security

In November 2011, the Indian Navy was particularly incensed with what a US naval lieutenant had posted on a blog. The unnamed lieutenant, who spent four days on destroyer INS Delhi in the Arabian Sea as part of an exchange programme, called the Indian crew “generally clueless”, with “almost zero seamanship skills”. This was one in a long, harsh critique of what he saw on the frontline warship. The blog was removed days after it was posted.

Did the blog touch a raw nerve? Just 10 months earlier, the naval frigate INS Vindhyagiri collided with a merchant tanker in Mumbai harbour sank. It was the fourth time a warship was completely written off in 23 years. Since 1990, the Indian Navy has lost one warship in peacetime every five years. Since 2004, it has lost one naval combatant every two years. Few global navies have such a dubious record. Five days after the August 14 explosion destroyed INS Sindhurakshak, killing 18 crew members, Defence Minister A.K. Antony told Rajya Sabha that “preliminary probe indicated the blast was due to possible ignition of armament”. Armed with torpedoes and missiles, the submarine was fully fuelled and ready to sail for patrol early next morning.

Former southern naval chief Vice Admiral K.N. Sushil (retired) cautions it is too early to conclude it sank due to negligence. Evidence points to a blast in an oxygen-powered torpedo, he says. “The Navy must do a forensic examination to pinpoint the cause,” he says.

What is worrying is that with each warship loss, key maritime capabilities are being lost. The Sindhurakshak had returned from Russia four months ago, and after a two-and-a-half year refit, was the Navy’s most potent conventional submarine. The frigate INS Vindhyagiri was the only warship that could control spy drones far out at sea.

Peacetime losses of warships are not uncommon. Since the World War II, the US Navy has lost 16 warships in accidents. Russia’s nuclear submarine Kursk sank in August 2000 after a faulty torpedo exploded during a training exercise. But in case of the smaller Indian Navy-it only has 30 frontline warships and 14 submarines-they point to a far disturbing trend, of human rather than technical error. The Prahar and Vindhyagiri collided with lumbering merchant vessels. The INS Agray was cut into half in 2004 when a crew member tossed a misfired anti-submarine rocket overboard. The spate of accidents comes at a time when the fleet is expanding in both size and complexity. Last year, it acquired INS Chakra, its first nuclear-powered attack submarine from Russia. It is set to induct its largest ship, the 44,000-tonne aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, from Russia this year. Former eastern naval commander Vice Admiral A.K. Singh (retired) slams the Government’s apathy. “The Navy is operating vessels long past their service years of 25 and 30 years as the government doesn’t sanction new ones in time,” he says.

Ageing ships alone do not explain other accidents and collisions. Naval officials say there are a series of smaller mishaps that point to Standard Operating Procedures (sops) not being followed. The August 2009 collision of the missile corvette INS Kuthar with destroyer INS Ranvir in the Bay of Bengal was traced to a rudder failure, compounded by a flawed manoeuvre. In 2010, three crew men on destroyer INS Mumbai were instantly killed when an AK-630 Gatling gun went off as safety drills were not followed. The submarine INS Sindhughosh collided twice; once with a fishing boat in 2006 and once with a merchant vessel in 2007. “The Navy has put in place multiple, institutionalised methods and procedures towards enhancing safety,” a naval spokesperson said, responding to a questionnaire. “Each type of unit has a Safety Class Authority that oversees safety aspects and guides safety related policy. On completion of major repairs, all units undergo a safety audit, prior joining respective formations.”

“The problem is that we aren’t empowering our young officers,” admits a senior naval officer, echoing what the US navy blogger said. Experience levels have suffered as there is a mismatch between number of warships and officers. Each year, 60 captain-ranked officers vie for the command of 15-20 warships. “A decade ago, a captain got two 18-month long sea tenures, allowing him to build up experience; today he gets only one,” says a naval officer.

“Adequate sea tenures are provided to all concerned,” a naval spokesperson said.

In 2006, then defence minister Pranab Mukherjee pulled Navy brass up after a spate of accidents. Accidents have however continued despite ‘safety stand down’ procedures performed on all warships every quarter, and court-martials. The loss of the Sindhurakshak has now pushed them to unacceptable levels.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 27 Aug 2013 14:28

Night flights have been conducted on Vikramaditya since 23 August. So far only minor damage to two MiGs reported.
Weapon configuration 2 X-35 + 2 R-73 + centreline tank has been tested.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 27 Aug 2013 16:14

We now have capability for SSN but can not build a decent SSK??? This itself shows a serious issue of import/PSU decease which needs urgent cure. PSU shipyards failed time and again the keep the schedule with inordinate delays. Immediate privatization of PSU ship yards and private production seems to be only answer.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Aug 2013 17:41

The fundamental problem MUST be put down to protracted decisionmaking and delays by the MOD,due to either indifference or lack of technical knowledge in the MOD establishment,often spoken of by the services.There is no "red light" flashing on timelines for critical acquisitions/replacements,etc.Look at the inordinate delay in acquiring a sub rescue vessel.I remember posting options a few years ago.The sub acquisition masterplan was done during Adm.Bhagwat's time.Maintenance has always been a major issue ,esp. of the "Red fleet",warships and subs of the Eastern Fleet,which used to be mainly of soviet origin.The sinking of INS Andamans was a major embarrassment for the IN years ago.

It is an inescapable fact that standards have dropped in general in the services,due to many factors.While there is a high excellence in many areas,the general level of maintenance and training has suffered over the years.Lack of basic trainers,AJTs and sub-standard HAL built aircraft led to many crashes and fatalities.Read the sub issues,where for years a Kilo class sub has languished at Vizag because HSL failed to deliver ,so all Kilo sub refits and upgrades are being done in Russia.The Scorpene delay by MDL is another major embarrassment,a 4+ yr. delay and massive cost overruns where a small conventional non-AIP Scorpene costs almost as much as an Akula .

DPSUs who monopolise the Indian defence industry have no competition whatsoever,protect their turf,have little or no accountability and are loath to allow pvt. industry to participate.They and babudom perpetuate the problem and the political leadership has failed to correct the situ.However,in the case of alleged IN failings,the ball is now in the CNS' court to rectify the situ and if done so would be the best legacy of his tenure.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 27 Aug 2013 18:39

arijitkm wrote:Indian Navy’s dubious safety record worrisome for national security

In November 2011, the Indian Navy was particularly incensed with what a US naval lieutenant had posted on a blog. The unnamed lieutenant, who spent four days on destroyer INS Delhi in the Arabian Sea as part of an exchange programme, called the Indian crew “generally clueless”, with “almost zero seamanship skills”. This was one in a long, harsh critique of what he saw on the frontline warship. The blog was removed days after it was posted.

Did the blog touch a raw nerve? Just 10 months earlier, the naval frigate INS Vindhyagiri collided with a merchant tanker in Mumbai harbour sank. It was the fourth time a warship was completely written off in 23 years. Since 1990, the Indian Navy has lost one warship in peacetime every five years. Since 2004, it has lost one naval combatant every two years. Few global navies have such a dubious record.

I don't remember coming across any such incident in last 3 years at all, if there was one it'd have been discussed to death on BRF.

Then what ???

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 27 Aug 2013 20:20

http://www.smartwar.org/2011/09/iama-us ... y-warship/

It happened...like with the (in)famous Col. Fornoff, it's good to glean the interesting details and ignore the BS.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 27 Aug 2013 21:02

partly OT. apologies.

Philip,

Lack of basic trainers,AJTs and sub-standard HAL built aircraft led to many crashes and fatalities.

you had posted this IE report in a different thread - on the engines manufactured by HAL Koraput as being the culprit in many crashes. now it is well known russian engines have 'appreciably' lower MTBO/MTBF as compared to the western ones due to their weaker metallurgy and material. the SU would just replace the engine at mid life upgrades rather than overhaul an engine IIRC!! it is only in the recent times they have improved the MTBO and MTBF is now upto 4000hrs for the RD 33/AL 31FP, still a lot less vis a vis 6000hrs/8000hrs for the european/american engines. many previous gen engines had an MTBF less than 750hrs (explains replacement rather than overhaul) or less in many cases!!

now the (MIG 21/27) R 25/R 29B engines are ancient (60s and 70s) engines with hardly any worthy operational life because they belong to a different gen. i even doubt if there is any OEM support now. there is enough open info on the net on their notoriety. infact IAF itself tried outfitting - with the russian involvement - AL 30 (?) engine on Mig 27 but dropped the idea!!! besides emergency use of afterburnerS reduced the already lower MTBF even further. and HAL was not manufaturing them locally, only 'assembling' the engines (from the ckd kits) IIRC. the only russian engine 'supposedly' being built from local raw material is AL 31FP for the SU 30MKIs.

so unless one has all the details of the R-25(Mig 21)/R-29B(Mig 27) engine usage in the IAF, one can not arrive at sweeping statements 'based' on a media report and you very well know how 'our' defence journos report.

Read the sub issues,where for years a Kilo class sub has languished at Vizag because HSL failed to deliver ,so all Kilo sub refits and upgrades are being done in Russia.

sorry. you are making it look as if HSL, on its own, is repairing the sub!! please note it is under russian technical supervision that the repair/upgrade is happening. do read the links below -

At the February 2002 India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commission on Military Technical Cooperation, then-incumbent Defence Minister George Fernandes stated, "It has also been agreed to accord priority to the setting up of facilities required for the medium refit and upgradation of 877EKM submarines in India." This indicates that future refits of the remaining submarines might occur in India itself, rather than being sent to Russia. Reports indicate that the mid-life refits of two more submarines will occur at Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Vishakapatnam under Russian technical supervision. The two boats in question are probably INS Sindhukirti and INS Sindhudhvaj, as they are the last pair (from the original eight vessels) to undergo a mid-life refit. The United News of India (UNI) reported on 12 January 2006, that refit work had commenced on INS Sindhukirti at Hindustan SY Ltd.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Subm ... Class.html

Severodvinsk expects to receive its next order from India in 2014 or 2015. In the meantime, it will repair and upgrade INS Sindukirti at its base in Visakhapatnam in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, and provide after-sales support for ships previously modernised by Zvyozdochka.

http://indrus.in/economics/2013/04/29/i ... 24289.html

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 27 Aug 2013 22:12

RajitO wrote:http://www.smartwar.org/2011/09/iama-us ... y-warship/

It happened...like with the (in)famous Col. Fornoff, it's good to glean the interesting details and ignore the BS.

Anyone who has spent more then half a day with the Navy at sea will tell you this is absolute BS.. Should be absolutely ignored.

On the other hand this seems like some Chanakyan Anti-Chin Anti-Khan Psy ops which will make them see the IN as lesser of a adversary

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 27 Aug 2013 22:14

amreeki bhai probably couldnt cope with / understand head nodding mannerisms of sdre's and lungi dance...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 02:06

Pragnya,poor quality of HAL made engines,etc. is well known.This details of the posted report poor quality (40% ) is said to be taken from an MOD report some of which AKA briefed the house. Details have from time to time been featured in the media.I posted some time ago one by an IAF officer ,how HAL was shown burn marks on new engines,no space between engine and fuselage in new fighters , etc.HAL allegedly refused to acknowledge them until they were shown the same.One can't simply blame all reports of poor quality on biased media reporting,though I acknowledge that media reports often display considerable ignorance about defence matters and facts.As for lifespan of MIGs,engines,etc.Why are we still operating the type 50+ years on? Whose fault is it that replacements for the IAF have not come on time? The LCA saga is another doctoral thesis ocean to trawl.

HAL's deficiencies are well mentioned in a former chairman's article in a BR link itself.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Today ... hopra.html

Just a few quotes.

HAL is no centre of excellence. Their design capability is limited and production skills are much better. In my opinion there are just very few centres of excellence in India. Indian Space Organisation ISRO) is one which competes with the world and IT industry also delivers service solutions to world standards.

HAL is a vertically integrated company. Practically every item is made in house ranging from accessories, avionics, and engines to aircraft. It is a management’s nightmare. No company in the world attempts such vertical integration. About 60-70% of a Boeing aircraft is made by subcontractors.

All of us are interested in indigenisation but there are difficulties to achieve it in high technology items. The technology for some licenced items exists. Even if we produce 100 aircraft/helicopters annually, the quantity required for units will be so small that manufacturing units will not be viable. For technology developed in India, again the quantities required are too little unless export market is available. Developed countries do not make every item required for their defence industries and resort to import from each other. I am glad to learn indigenisation achieved by the Indian Navy is substantial. I think large numbers of items used in ships are of lower technology compared to aircraft but I am open to correction. The diesel engines for the indigenous aircraft carrier are imported from General Electric, USA. I believe no diesel engine has been designed developed in India except for the Tata Indica.

Coming back to the IN and Kilo repairs at HSL,how come that with acknowledged Russian help we have built the ATV at Vizag but languished on the Kilo? HSL was a loss making co., taken over by the MOD.Barring the ATV being built,it had no experience whatsoever with sub building.We purchased the Kilos but did not enter into any agreement (unlike U-209s or Scorpenes) for building the subs under licence or undertaking refits in India.Normal assistance /after sales support is what one can expect.One report says that the

The (L1) syndrome of lowest cost tender acceptance system of procurement leaves little flexibility.
Some times, the L1 issue has become a challenge for logistic and acquisition managers in India’s Armed Forces.

That capability at MDL also evaporated after the last two U-boats were assembled.Look now at how MDL is struggling with the Scorpene,4+ yrs. delayed It isn't as if the Russians haven't been willing to help.There is an interview with the Rubin and Malachite bureaus who have been waiting for a decade after their offers to help local sub building.Until the recent disaster ,the P-75I project was gathering dust! AKA has suddenly sprung to life.Perhaps one of the sub's missiles reached his office and found his seat in Delhi!

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 28 Aug 2013 02:55

@Pushkar.Bhat ^^^ " Should be absolutely ignored. .."

No signals should be ignored. They may be false but deciding to 'ignore' something that irritates is evolutionary folly. To draw a stretched example: Steve Ballmer's admonition to his kids not to use Google or the iPod:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6055250-7.html

"In an interview with Fortune, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer stated that not only does he not own an iPod--he's forbidden the popular music gadget for his family as well.

"My children--in many dimensions they're as poorly behaved as many other children, but at least on this dimension I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod," Ballmer told the magazine. (Google is out of favor in the Gates household, too.)

That was 2006. Apple and Google went on to eclipse MSFT in market cap and popular imagination.

Fornoff may indeed be full of BS, BUT managers would be wise to: a. Not ignore and b. glean the the kernels of truth (if any, to improve). Nothing is perfect and no plan/strategy works forever.

Underground conferences among ostriches have not been known to be productive.

Only the paranoid survive.

That said, your point is also valid: don't accept at face value.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2013 03:51

pushkar.bhat wrote:
RajitO wrote:http://www.smartwar.org/2011/09/iama-us ... y-warship/

It happened...like with the (in)famous Col. Fornoff, it's good to glean the interesting details and ignore the BS.
Anyone who has spent more then half a day with the Navy at sea will tell you this is absolute BS.. Should be absolutely ignored.

On the other hand this seems like some Chanakyan Anti-Chin Anti-Khan Psy ops which will make them see the IN as lesser of a adversary

Pushkar, like it or not since the article has been posted, people will read it and go away with a confused mindset - esp. those who haven't been near Indian navy ships or been on them or known IN officers. So, if you can pick out specific instances where you think the author is just openly BS'ing - call him out on that. Its good for the forum and the least we can do when such rubbish is written.

milindj · Post by **milindj** » 28 Aug 2013 05:21

Boeing's P-8I aircraft for the Indian Navy with finishing touches being added. Spotted at the Boeing factory near Seattle.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 28 Aug 2013 07:48

Philip,

Pragnya,poor quality of HAL made engines,etc. is well known.This details of the posted report poor quality (40% ) is said to be taken from an MOD report some of which AKA briefed the house. Details have from time to time been featured in the media.I posted some time ago one by an IAF officer ,how HAL was shown burn marks on new engines,no space between engine and fuselage in new fighters , etc.HAL allegedly refused to acknowledge them until they were shown the same.One can't simply blame all reports of poor quality on biased media reporting,though I acknowledge that media reports often display considerable ignorance about defence matters and facts.

if IAF can admonish the HAL 'publicly' on maintainence support as they did in AI 2013, do you think they will just keep mum on a very serious issue as 'poor quality' engine?? IIRC IAF has not, to date, made any such public comments as reported by the NIE which you had linked. as to the IAF flagging the MOD on the same - as i stated in my last post, these are ancient engines with very low MTBF and were assembled at HAL. as is very well known IAF has a very high rate of flying (for all aircratfs) for training (possibly only next to the USA) purposes which becomes even more pronounced in the case of Mig 21s due to the sheer number of aircrafts. also to be noted IAF used Mig 21s as stage 3 trainer!! so think about it - low MTBF engine and high rate of flying!! you can well imagine engine issues cropping up!! have all the engines of Mig 21s/27s have been replaced at MTBF regularly?? i doubt it.

so unless one has first hand report on the engine MTBF, no of hours flown, overhaul/replacement schedule - one can not conclude that HAL is at fault for producing low quality engines when the 'engine quality' itself is in question wrt modern times.

in future if HAL built AL 31FP throws up quality issues with the SUs then it would be worth talking about.

besides the OEM does not support these engines anymore IIRC. the OEM may have stopped producing the engines. heck post SU breakup, there has been a spares issues with Mig 29/IL 76s too which are well documented.

also note R-77s procured from Russia were duds!! i am not trying to derail the debate but only trying to inform you that with even direct import, quality has been an issue.

As for lifespan of MIGs,engines,etc.Why are we still operating the type 50+ years on? Whose fault is it that replacements for the IAF have not come on time? The LCA saga is another doctoral thesis ocean to trawl.

i look at it differently than you. there have been inductions of new aircrafts even before IOC. do you think LCA mark 1 is worse than a Mig 21 that it can't replace?? this is peace time and IAF has all the time in the world to do the things - it is doing now - post induction too. the TPs (IAF pilots only) have been heaping praises on the LCA and these are the guys who are directly working on the machine. they do send across a point i guess.

you keep talking of Mark 1 being underpowered while many aircrafts in IAF inventory incl Mig 21/M 2000/Jags/Mig 27s are 'even more underpowered' than LCA 1. so what are the yard sticks??

also rate of prod (8/yr). pray tell how can anyone churn out more when the order is only 20!! 20 more only post IOC 2. considering the imminent Mig 21/27 phaseouut, the IAF needs to place an order of a minimum 4 squadrons of LCA 1 which will only benefit everyone. an augmented assembly line, optimium and dedicated production staff, ironing out QC issues which are bound to come up, working out maintaince logistics, building support eco system, building aircraft numbers etc..

also note the kind of economy we are in, with Rupee going over the roof, it is going to be an uphill task for the IAF to procure high cost imports. they have to work, 'make it work' and support the LCA 1/2. there should not be any doubt on this score.

HAL's deficiencies are well mentioned in a former chairman's article in a BR link itself.

Philip i am not trying to defend the HAL which has its own set of issues that do afflict the PSUs in general. i am trying only to contest the rather 'sweeping' remark you made based on a media link.

i went thro' the wing commander/HAL chairman's article. while the observations are general in nature, his grouse against HAL is wrt management/R&D issues. OTOH he praises HAL on the production side!!! he does it more than once. let me quote one -

The strength of HAL lies in production and overhaul. The work force is experienced and normally produces aircraft to schedule.

this quote has significance wrt point i am trying to make on the issue of debate. that HAL was only assembling, licence production agency wrt Mig 21/Mig 27 engines. hope you see the point.

Coming back to the IN and Kilo repairs at HSL,how come that with acknowledged Russian help we have built the ATV at Vizag but languished on the Kilo?

it seems to me the sub in question is beyond repair!! may be a write off. it would be incredible if it cant be put back to the sea if the repair/upgrade is happening under the russian OEM's technical watch.

HSL was a loss making co., taken over by the MOD.Barring the ATV being built,it had no experience whatsoever with sub building.We purchased the Kilos but did not enter into any agreement (unlike U-209s or Scorpenes) for building the subs under licence or undertaking refits in India.Normal assistance /after sales support is what one can expect.One report says that the

true. India did not go into an agreement on licence building the Kilos but repair/overhaul/upgrade (with russian material and watch) agreement was concluded in early to mid 2000. the links i posted are pretty clear.

That capability at MDL also evaporated after the last two U-boats were assembled.Look now at how MDL is struggling with the Scorpene,4+ yrs. delayed It isn't as if the Russians haven't been willing to help.There is an interview with the Rubin and Malachite bureaus who have been waiting for a decade after their offers to help local sub building.

while it is a tragedy in the indian scenario (read congress party led govts) that any corruption charge means 'total' stop to the activity as happened with HDWs, the scorpene issue is quite different and complex - the delays are only expected but MDL is on record that the original schedule of delivery (well roughly) will be adhered to.

russians are eager no doubt but with Amur subs having issues, what sub can they offer?? Kilos are off from the table looking into the future.

Until the recent disaster ,the P-75I project was gathering dust! AKA has suddenly sprung to life.Perhaps one of the sub's missiles reached his office and found his seat in Delhi!

well said.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 08:18

Prag,I agree with many of the points you've made,we have been licence manufacturers in truth,but we do have our problems with quality control.The track record is there.HTT-32,etc.(“Most of the cause factors can be classified as defects during manufacturing or overhauling process. IAF has been flagging these issues but government’s response is slow,” said an official on the condition of anonymity)
http://newindianexpress.com/nation/IAF- ... on=comment.

If the above report ,based upon what AKA briefed the house is inaccurate,then HAL needs to clarify the same as this image will stick in the public's perception.

I thought that the IAF's order for MK-1 was 20+20? If only 3-4 aircraft can be built in the first few years by HAL,and the first sqd. arriving only 2017+,how can the conversion,training,etc. take place? That's the point that Air Cmde.Khokar is making out. (LCA td. "Do we want Tejas or not?") From his status report it is not lack of orders for the LCA MK-1 which is delaying induction,but developmental/testing delays and a very low production rate,as of now not one Mk-1 has been built.First sqd. will arrive only by end 2017

Has any decision been taken on the follow on order for an extra 4 P-8s? I spotted a 2011/12 CAG report where the state of the remaining Bears are becoming problematic.There was another more recent item about prolonging the life of these aircraft (those airworthy) because of the ultra-LR capabilities.The Rupee having lost about 25% in its value since June,isn't helping matters at all.the Food Sec. Bill at this time is a sheer election stunt that should've been shut down by the EC/SC.It is only going to lead to more monumental corruption when the distribution system PDS is in such sad shape.Just recently,one of my staff told me that eggs,meant for school kid mid-day meals were being sold at lower than market rates by the school staff! 800M Indians are now by the govts. own admission below the poverty line.The effect on the forces is going to be massive.Even if we open up items to Indian cos. ,as posted elsewhere,it will take time and volumes being so small will be uneconomical for pvt.industry.Bleak days ahead.

From various reports,another 4 subs are also in some stage of short and long refits.That leaves just 7 subs seaworthy apart from the Chakra.With the loss of its most capable conventional sub,the In is up the creek with only one paddle.

PS:Pandyan,"govt. owned" at taxpayer's expense! Seriously,does the RTI extend to defence/security matters? I'm not so sure.MPs ask Qs in parliament which have to be replied to and the standing committee on defence is supposed to monitor the health of the nation's defence.
I've been able to find this item/site.It is from comments in a piece by BK.Perhaps the issue can be debated in detail in another appropriate td.

Zero for DRDO
Bharat Karnad | 26th Apr 2013 - Deccan Chronicle
http://corruptionindrdo.com/2013/05/01/zero-for-drdo/

In Hal maximum technical head are simply deg.or diploma, not in aeronautical egg ,80 to 90 percent in Hal, technician / eggs are unqualified and untrained to work on that particulate IAF a/c, where are they in Hal, I exposed that in Hal Agra,/ All hal divi. more then 90 percent technician / eng. Are UN trained and UN qualified MCF AN-32 / SU 30 / JAGUAR Etc / 3rd and 4th line servicing on How they are doing 1800 hrs servicing of an-32 since year 2000 TIL Date I got all documentary proof against technical corruption in Hal Under RTI act 2005,I am reporting the matter that poor servicing of defense a/c by Hal, since 10 mar.2005 Hal authority / IAF authority / MOD / hon. president of India for that Hal victimized me to raise the voice Against poor service of defense a/c ,no investigation from MOD / president of India till date

The information against corruption in DRDO uploaded on this website by me is backed up by appropriate documents, letters and evidences gathered through the Right to Information Act. If anybody wishes to challenge the authenticity of this information, they are welcome to contact me to seek further details.

Prabhu Dandriyal.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 28 Aug 2013 08:48

pragnya wrote: you had posted this IE report in a different thread - on the engines manufactured by HAL Koraput as being the culprit in many crashes. now it is well known russian engines have 'appreciably' lower MTBO/MTBF as compared to the western ones due to their weaker metallurgy and material. the SU would just replace the engine at mid life upgrades rather than overhaul an engine IIRC!! it is only in the recent times they have improved the MTBO and MTBF is now upto 4000hrs for the RD 33/AL 31FP, still a lot less vis a vis 6000hrs/8000hrs for the european/american engines. many previous gen engines had an MTBF less than 750hrs (explains replacement rather than overhaul) or less in many cases!!

now the (MIG 21/27) R 25/R 29B engines are ancient (60s and 70s) engines with hardly any worthy operational life because they belong to a different gen. i even doubt if there is any OEM support now. there is enough open info on the net on their notoriety. infact IAF itself tried outfitting - with the russian involvement - AL 30 (?) engine on Mig 27 but dropped the idea!!! besides emergency use of afterburnerS reduced the already lower MTBF even further. and HAL was not manufaturing them locally, only 'assembling' the engines (from the ckd kits) IIRC. the only russian engine 'supposedly' being built from local raw material is AL 31FP for the SU 30MKIs.

so unless one has all the details of the R-25(Mig 21)/R-29B(Mig 27) engine usage in the IAF, one can not arrive at sweeping statements 'based' on a media report and you very well know how 'our' defence journos report.

The design philosophy of russian engines is/was different from that of the western engines. The russians designers stress ease of engine maintenance while the westerner designers stress engine life.

Even though the western engines have a TBO of " 6000hrs/8000hrs for the european/american engines", it's extremely difficult to get there.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 28 Aug 2013 10:37

Philip,

The track record is there.HTT-32,

agree on the HPT 32 Deepak but 2 issues -

1. i do agree with IAF on the 'present'. given HAL's inability to rectify the trainer and subsequent grounding, IAF had no choice but to go for an import so that their training did not suffer. even the HTT 40 (supposed to fly in 2015 and production 2017 onwards) was not going to fit in their timeline.

2. OTOH i dont agree with IAF on what they could have done in the past. i don't think the HPT 32 issue cropped up out of the blue. IAF must have known it for long. HAL had put forward a replacement programme much much earlier but the IAF was not keen.

I thought that the IAF's order for MK-1 was 20+20? If only 3-4 aircraft can be built in the first few years by HAL,and the first sqd. arriving only 2017+,how can the conversion,training,etc. take place? That's the point that Air Cmde.Khokar is making out. (LCA td. "Do we want Tejas or not?")

it is only 20 confirmed but an order of 20 more post FOC (sorry i wrote post IOC in my last post).

LSPs are going to be used for setting up the first squadron i guess. may be all the older LSPs will be brought up to production standard variant IMO but am not sure on this.

From his status report it is not lack of orders for the LCA MK-1 which is delaying induction,but developmental/testing delays and a very low production rate,as of now not one Mk-1 has been built.First sqd. will arrive only by end 2017

which is why i said the balance testing can be done after induction. there are many precedents in different countries.

Has any decision been taken on the follow on order for an extra 4 P-8s?

not to my knowledge. do read this and this.

the number may eventually go upto 24.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 10:52

Anyone know how to arrest the "spinning" Rupee? The imminent US strikes on Syria is going to see it in grave danger of crashing.All our debate is going to be academic as it hurtles closer to the ground.PC has unveiled his "10 pt." programme to rescue the economy.I have a better "1 pt." one.PC.MMS.Soniaji,UPA et al, "Quit India!" In any case they can use their ejector seats and parachutes while the common man perishes.

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 28 Aug 2013 11:26

With Rupee Crashing to 68 today, we will not be in a position to buy any defense stuff from anybody apart from Iran ( We can pay them rupees )

Lets ask them to build our next line of subs. Anyways Iran has an indigenous sub building program.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 17:22

Ha!Ha! Sohamn,very true,at least they're building their homebuilt mini subs without any apparent outside help and we may be soon be seeing them in action in the Gulf as the "Ayatollah-too-many" has just said that the region is "sitting on gunpowder".

kmc_chacko · Post by **kmc_chacko** » 28 Aug 2013 19:24

sohamn wrote:With Rupee Crashing to 68 today, we will not be in a position to buy any defense stuff from anybody apart from Iran ( We can pay them rupees )

Lets ask them to build our next line of subs. Anyways Iran has an indigenous sub building program.

If I am correct last time for Imports from Iran we had paid Gold not Indian Rupee

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 28 Aug 2013 22:25

@ Phillip totally in agreement.

@kmc_chacko - We can pay them in rupees ( Iran has UCO Bank current account in Kolkata ) or gold or even barter rice for a submarine.But the serious issue that we face today is similar to the lost decade of 90's. Back then we had a poor current a/c deficit and hence we couldn't purchase abroad, now we have even a poorer current a/c deficit coupled with undervalued rupee and hence there will be severe cutdown in our defence expenditure.

Some would argue that Navy is partially insulated because it has a strong shipbuilding program, but please remember even while manufacturing say kolkata class destroyer we imported the engines, steel, fcr, ciws, SAM and payed royalty on many products like RBUs, Radars etc. So I predict we shall see a dramatic slowdown on procurement in recent future.

raj-ji · Post by **raj-ji** » 28 Aug 2013 22:47

Lalmohan wrote:amreeki bhai probably couldnt cope with / understand head nodding mannerisms of sdre's and lungi dance...

^

+1

Also it could be cultural. This officer probably came in with the mindset that he was going to show the inexperienced natives how things are done. And was probably upset no one asked his opinion. Also cultural differences in how someone communicates with someone else, doesn't mean one type of communication is better than another. Important to note that no accidents or incidents happened while he was on board.

My reply to this officer would be, if you didn't learn anything about how things can be done differently by other navies. Your time on board was a waste. You get better by learning from others, not criticizing.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 28 Aug 2013 23:30

X-posted here

An important development and that too announced very publicly . Yet it seems to have escaped notice here.

India's first military satellite will help keep tabs on Indian Ocean region

Thanks to Navy.

NEW DELHI: India's first dedicated military satellite GSAT-7 or "Rukmini", which will be launched by Arianespace from French Guiana on Friday, will provide the Navy with an almost 2,000-nautical-mile-footprint over the critical Indian Ocean region (IOR).

Essentially a geo-stationary communication satellite to enable real-time networking of all Indian warships, submarines and aircraft with operational centres ashore, the 2,625kg Rukmini will also help the Navy keep a hawk-eye over both Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal. "From Persian Gulf to Malacca Strait, it will help cover almost 70% of the IOR," said a source.

The "over-the-sea use" Rukmini, with UHF, S, Ku and C-band transponders, is to be followed by GSAT-7A with the IAF and Army sharing its "over-the-land use" bandwidth. The Navy has been clamouring for such a satellite for close to a decade now to shorten its "sensor-to-shooter loop" - the ability to swiftly detect and tackle a threat — but the delay in the indigenous GSLV rocket to carry satellites and other factors have been the stumbling blocks.

India, of course, has been a late — and somewhat reluctant — entrant into the military space arena despite having a robust civilian programme for decades. Without dedicated satellites of their own, the armed forces were relegated to using "dual use" Cartosat satellites or the Technology Experimental Satellite launched in 2001, apart from leasing foreign satellite transponders for surveillance, navigation and communication purposes.

China, in sharp contrast, has taken huge strides in the military space arena, testing even ASAT (anti-satellite) weapons against "low-earth orbit" satellites since January 2007. "With counter-space being a top priority, China has been testing its 'direct-ascent kinetic kill' capabilities. It also has active programmes for kinetic and directed-energy laser weapons as well as nano-satellites. By 2020, it hopes to have a space station with military applications," said a source.

Incidentally, around 300 dedicated or dual-use military satellites are orbiting around the earth, with the US owning 50% of them, followed by Russia and China. But India has lagged far behind in utilization of the final frontier of space for military purposes, refusing to even approve the long-standing demand of the armed forces for a full-fledged Aerospace Command, as earlier reported by TOI.

Though officially against " any offensive space capabilities or weaponization of space", the defence ministry in 2010 had come out with a 15-year "Technology Perspective and Capability Roadmap" that dwelt on the need to develop ASAT weapons "for electronic or physical destruction of satellites in both LEO (2,000km altitude above earth's surface) and GEO-synchronous orbits". These portions were quietly deleted in the roadmap released earlier this year.

DRDO contends it can develop ASAT weapons if required by marrying the propulsion system of the over 5,000-km Agni-V missile with the "kill vehicle" of its two-tier BMD (ballistic missile system) system.

Apart from working on "directed energy weapons" at its Laser Science &Technology Centre, DRDO also has futuristic programmes for launching "mini-satellites on demand" for use in the battlefield as well as "EMP (electromagnetic pulse) hardening" of satellites and sensors to protect them against ASAT weapons.

But all that is in the future. Dedicated military satellites like Rukmini will help India keep real-time tabs over the rapidly-militarizing IOR, where China is increasingly expanding its strategic footprint, as well as on troop movements, missile silos, military installations and airbases across land borders.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Aug 2013 04:31

The guy should stick to the story at hand and not go all over the board.

vina · Post by **vina** » 30 Aug 2013 14:10

Indian NAVY - India designed and built Nuclear Submarine, Aircraft Carrier and Satellite (in addition to a long list of ships).

Indian AIRFORCE - Importing a basic trainer !

Indian Army - Importing everything , including trivial things like pistols, rifles and even their ammo!

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 30 Aug 2013 14:22

Does not BSF or coastal security not want light fighter aircrafts and ammunition too? Probably by 2014-15 more ammunition may be needed for J&K VDCs for example.

rahulm · Post by **rahulm** » 30 Aug 2013 16:06

International Fleet Review 2013 - Sydney 1st to 10th October 2013

List of Ships participating INS Sahyadri sole IN participant.

I had the opportunity to visit INS Mumbai and INS Jyoti during the last IFR in Sydney in 1999. INS Mum bai still carried her commissioning crew and it was a superb experience. I stayed inside the ship for 2 full days and was invited for formal evening drinks on her deck. Many of the officers had been taught by my father.

Any interest from the few BRF'ites down under? Maybe time for a BR Sydney meet.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 30 Aug 2013 16:22

vina wrote:Indian NAVY - India designed and built Nuclear Submarine, Aircraft Carrier and Satellite (in addition to a long list of ships).

Indian AIRFORCE - Importing a basic trainer !

Indian Army - Importing everything , including trivial things like pistols, rifles and even their ammo!

That in a nutshell is how each service treats the process of creating a mil-industrial complex. IAF and IA by having a koi-hai culture and the IN by a partnership and nurturing culture.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 30 Aug 2013 16:25

do the services sponsor engineering courses in the universities? could they not build a cadre of specifically skilled engineers, pay them a decent amount and have them work on key strategic programmes. and here i mean not just the high end dev work, but all through the supply chain?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 30 Aug 2013 17:51

Lalmohan wrote:do the services sponsor engineering courses in the universities? could they not build a cadre of specifically skilled engineers, pay them a decent amount and have them work on key strategic programmes. and here i mean not just the high end dev work, but all through the supply chain?

Naval academy now grants a BTech.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Aug 2013 19:06

Isro has also started its own engineering college of sorts in trivandrum iirc.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 30 Aug 2013 21:03

But all that is in the future. Dedicated military satellites like Rukmini will help India keep real-time tabs over the rapidly-militarizing IOR, where China is increasingly expanding its strategic footprint, as well as on troop movements, missile silos, military installations and airbases across land borders.

The article seems to indicate that Rukmini will also have a surveillance mission, which I doubt for a Geo satellite. Its a dedicated communications satellite for the Navy, with "surveillance" implication added in by DDM'itis

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 30 Aug 2013 21:12

Southern naval command gets 2 aviation simulators

Speaking to media after inaugurating the WSTF, Admiral Soni said it is the most sophisticated such facility in the world.

“It’s the first such facility in Asia and third in the world. It’s the most sophisticated facility and will provide a platform for other countries also to train their personnel at a later stage,” he said.

“The facility has been set up at a cost of `20.2 crore and we should utilise it properly,” he said.

The Admiral said such facilities help in reducing accident rate and told the crew to focus on proper maintenance so that the facilities can be utilised for many years. Prior to the event, the Admiral paid homage at the Seaking memorial on FATS premises.

The FATS is designed for pilots and observers of Seaking helicopters for initial and periodic training as well as evaluation of new procedures and tactics. The real life simulator, built with inputs from more than 110 Navy personnel and 200 engineers from Halbit and Elbit, is a PC-based system with glass cockpit, collimated visuals and an electro-pneumatic system with six degrees of freedom and motion.

The simulator is a roll on/roll off system wherein other aircraft cockpits can be also be inserted in lieu and flown.

The simulator can factor in all scenarios encountered by a Navy pilot, including deck landings on different warships, various emergencies, and night flying. Commander Wingston Mathew is the Officer-in-Charge of the FATS.

The WSTF will provide realistic training to air crew to escape from an aircraft under varied simulated conditions and crash scenarios. The facility, the first of its kind in India, has state-of-the-art survival training simulation theatre (STST) with several components.

A helicopter underwater escape trainer and cockpit underwater escape trainer of the STST will train the crew in escaping from a submerged aircraft.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 30 Aug 2013 21:21

merlin wrote:
vina wrote:Indian NAVY - India designed and built Nuclear Submarine, Aircraft Carrier and Satellite (in addition to a long list of ships).

Indian AIRFORCE - Importing a basic trainer !

Indian Army - Importing everything , including trivial things like pistols, rifles and even their ammo!
That in a nutshell is how each service treats the process of creating a mil-industrial complex. IAF and IA by having a koi-hai culture and the IN by a partnership and nurturing culture.

What about rejecting the Dhruv that the others have so wholeheartedly adopted?

The joys of generalization & some unpleasant facts that kill-joy

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 30 Aug 2013 21:32

Indian Navy Goes Shopping For Tablet Computers

http://www.aame.in/2013/08/indian-navy- ... ablet.html

any particular applications where a Tablet might require upwards of 4 USB ports? its stated the Tablets would be used by maintainers to access 'Aircraft Maintenance Publications'

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 30 Aug 2013 21:49

I wish they'd get off the Windows boat.

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 30 Aug 2013 22:13

God send opportunity for M$crosoft !!! Their Surface tablets are lying unsold in warehouses... (if only the Navy could look beyond Windows which is known to have failed miserably in mobile computing...

)

Microsoft permanently slashes price on struggling Surface Pro to $799

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 30 Aug 2013 22:56

^^^^ Huh! Are they crazy?? who approved or sanctioned this request? Windows OS on tablet is the worst idea for the navy. When the whole world shunned their pathetic mobile platform, Indian navy decides to acquire it. But I doubt surface or any other windows tablet could match the spec mentioned by the navy as there are none in the world with the same spec. This shows the lack of common sense of the navy brass.