Indian Naval Discussion

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4290
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2011 03:28

rajrang wrote:quote="VinodTK"China plans chequers to checkmate India
The race between the two Asian giants to dominate the seas has intensified. Alarmed at China’s plan to deploy by 2016 at least three aircraft carriers, which will give Beijing the capability to control vital sea channels, including those in the Indian Ocean, India has stepped up efforts to complete its Carrier Battle Group plan at the earliest.

/quote

If it is true that PRC will have 3 carriers within 5 years, imagine how many they are likely to have 15 years from now around 2025 - my guess is a minimum of 10! India's current plans call for only three carriers: IAC-2 (65,000 ton) besides the IAC-1 (40,000 ton) and Vikramaditya (45,000 ton). India needs to start planning NOW for IAC-3, IAC-4 etc., so these may be available 15 years from now.


All "3" aircraft carriers mentioned in the article are ex-Russian ships being overhauled by the Chinese. As the PLAN has no experience operating an aircraft carrier, IMO, it would take around 7 to 10 years for them to fully develop operational capacity (i.e. training, tactics, usage, etc). This would mean the PLAN would just be "carrier-capable" around 2020-2025 timeframe.

On the IN side of things, by 2025 IN should have at least 3 aircraft carriers (Vikramaditya, IAC-1, and IAC-2). Plus, possibly a fourth carrier (IAC-3) would be under construction (or in service).

In 2025, PLAN and IN would be about even on aircraft carrier capability.

However, having pointed out the above, Chinese are great at quickly learning and delivering in quantities. An aircraft carrier typically takes at least 7 to 10 years to be built from inception. IMO, only post-2025 PLAN would have the edge in aircraft carriers; it is likely another 3 to 4 indigenously built aircraft carriers would join around that timeframe. Total PLAN aircraft carriers just post 2025 would be around 6.

IMO, an ideal number of carriers for IN would be 6 units--2 each for Western, Southern, and Eastern commands-- by 2035.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3411
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby suryag » 14 Nov 2011 03:36

IMO, an ideal number of carriers for IN would be 6 units--2 each for Western, Southern, and Eastern commands-- by 2035.
Please add another three as reserve/refurbishment placeholders. Of course the above 6 carriers would need 2 subrmarines, 2 destroyers, 1 replensihment tanker and 2 frigates to form a battle group. Given our dwindling submarine numbers we should also focus on building more submarines via p-75I project. Of course GOI should be ready to shell out 10bil USD per battle group of this modest configuration

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4290
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2011 03:53

suryag wrote:
IMO, an ideal number of carriers for IN would be 6 units--2 each for Western, Southern, and Eastern commands-- by 2035.
Please add another three as reserve/refurbishment placeholders. Of course the above 6 carriers would need 2 subrmarines, 2 destroyers, 1 replensihment tanker and 2 frigates to form a battle group. Given our dwindling submarine numbers we should also focus on building more submarines via p-75I project. Of course GOI should be ready to shell out 10bil USD per battle group of this modest configuration


6 aircraft carriers would mean at least 3 to 4 available at all times with other 2 to 3 acting as reserves or undergoing refit.

Yes, you are right in that a carrier battle group would require additional investment from the IN. If we take your numbers for support elements, having 4 aircraft carrier battle groups available would require at least 36 other combat/support ships and their reserves (10 submarines, 6 replenishment tankers, 10 destroyers and 10 frigates). That's why I think 6 aircraft carriers (with 4 active and 2 reserve) is an achievable number by 2035.

akimalik
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 14 Apr 2010 11:27

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby akimalik » 14 Nov 2011 11:38

tsarkar wrote:Light bulb, helpful in marking the extremities of the ship so that one doesnt fall overboard at night.

I believe these are navigation lights, they are meant to indicate the ship and its orientation to other vessels at night.
This one being on the Jack-staff, there would be others on the main mast (depending on the size of the ship etc), port and stbd of the bridge etc etc.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3789
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Nov 2011 12:02

srai wrote:However, having pointed out the above, Chinese are great at quickly learning and delivering in quantities. An aircraft carrier typically takes at least 7 to 10 years to be built from inception. IMO, only post-2025 PLAN would have the edge in aircraft carriers; it is likely another 3 to 4 indigenously built aircraft carriers would join around that timeframe. Total PLAN aircraft carriers just post 2025 would be around 6.

IMO, an ideal number of carriers for IN would be 6 units--2 each for Western, Southern, and Eastern commands-- by 2035.


Precisely the point Srai sahab. They might not have the super tech they claim to (although there is reason to believe they have something), and they might require a few years to understand/get comfortable with carrier ops; however, there is little doubt, that once they have it figured, they'll churn out those boats faster than any kungpoo phyter around!

Also, it is little doubt that they'll have more than just a couple being built simultaneously.

CM

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Nov 2011 12:17

carrier construction is difficult to keep hidden unless special measures are done like 'secret' nikolayev covered shipward during cold war.

so any pics have emerged of new carriers under construction for the PLAN? are they cloning the varyag for safety or striking out with a bigger design?\

have no doubt, if pushed they can and will fund the parallel construction of 4 carriers to speed up the pipeline and induct them over 3-4 yrs together as they finish up.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3789
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Nov 2011 12:47

^ iirc, nothing apart from articles since a few years that they plan on building 6 carriers till 2015. If they get the Varyag right by say, 2013 - flight evals etc included (tall order), I shan't be surprised if they suddenly have 3-6 CBGs by 2016. At least images will be floating around, whether the boats can float or birds can fly, that we don't know for certain.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Nov 2011 19:25

my theory:
start with a pair of varyag clones with zorya power plant, and su27 with flight training from russia from kuznetsov training school
once the varyag + these two clones stabilizes in around 5 yrs of service + 5-7 yrs of construction ie around 2022, the game will truly be on as they will in parallel prolly around 2018 start construction of 2 bigger carriers in the 75,000t ballpark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_ai ... ent_status

Vashishtha
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 23:06
Location: look behind you

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Vashishtha » 14 Nov 2011 19:38

Wasn't the nerpa supposed to be coming sometime soon? The last time i read was nov-dec 2011...

Or do we still have plumbing problems?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Nov 2011 21:29

the ice cream machine vendor in kaliningrad has gone belly up and alternate vendor is being sought...

seriously saw some inside footage of a ohio sub and the machinery isolation via rubber grommets and bulbs is so intensive, even two treadmills in the gym and the hand dryer in the gents room and thus isolated.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 16 Nov 2011 01:08

"Opportunity knocks but once"! We have lost the opportunity to have had easy pickings of the UK's early retired Harriers,which could've been acquired at throwaway costs.I have been advocating this ver since the UK mothballed their Harriers.While many have derided the acquisition of them for the IN,particularly to serve in the Viraat and any future amphibioud flat tops,not so to an old experienced operator of the famous jump-jet,who have picked up the entire lot of 70+,lock,stock and barrrel.Who he? The USMC,who have acted wisely in order that they could preserve their amphibious air support capabilities since the JSF STOVL version might be dumped in the near future,leaving them without any VSTOL capability aboard their many amphibious flat tops.Even if we now want a few replacements to keep our numbers of aircraft on the Viraat healthy,it's too late.I'm not sure if any of the ex-RN Sea Harriers,which differ from the ex-RAF Harriers which were later used aboard RN carriers are also part of the deal.We will have to pick up some from other operators who are unlikely to sell.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/11/n ... s-111311w/

Xcpt:
Navy, Corps buying decommissioned U.K. Harriers

By Christopher P. Cavas, Vago Muradian and Andrew Chuter - Staff writers
Sunday Nov 13, 2011

The Navy and Marine Corps have agreed to buy Britain’s entire decommissioned fleet of 74 Harrier jump jets, along with engines and spare parts — a move expected to help the Corps operate Harriers into the mid-2020s and provide extra planes to replace aging two-seat F-18D Hornet strike fighters.

Rear Adm. Mark Heinrich, chief of the Navy’s Supply Corps, confirmed the two-part deal last week during a conference in New York sponsored by Bank of America Merrill Lynch in association with Defense News.

Heinrich negotiated the $50 million purchase of all Harrier spare parts, while Rear Adm. Donald Gaddis, the Navy’s program executive officer for tactical aircraft, is overseeing discussions to buy the Harrier aircraft and their Rolls-Royce engines, Heinrich said.

A spokesman for the British Ministry of Defence confirmed the Disposal Services Agency was in talks with the Navy for the sale of the Harriers. The deal had yet to be concluded, he said Friday.

Britain retired its joint force of Royal Air Force and Royal Navy Harrier aircraft late last year in one of the most controversial moves of the defense reductions, which also cut the aircraft carriers that operated the jets, other warships, maritime patrol planes and personnel.

Most of the retired Harriers are stored at Royal Air Force Base Cottesmore, England. They have been undergoing minimum fleet maintenance, including anti-deterioration measures, in order to keep them airworthy, Heinrich said.

A spokesman for the Navy’s Naval Air Systems Command declined on Friday to comment on the deal, deferring to the British military.

A British MoD source said Friday that he thought both deals could be signed in the next week or two. The MoD source confirmed that the entire fleet of 74 Harrier aircraft was involved in the sale.

Heinrich noted that payment details were the only outstanding issue on the parts deal discussions, and he said the purchase will give the Corps a relatively economical way to get their hands on key components to keep the Harrier fleet running.

While it is unusual for the U.S. to buy used foreign military aircraft for operation, integration of the British planes into Corps squadrons shouldn’t be a major problem, one expert said.

“I don’t think it will be costly to rip out the Brit systems” and replace them with Marine gear, said Lon Nordeen, author of several books on the Harrier.

Nordeen noted that the British GR 9 and 9As are similar in configuration to the Marines’ AV-8B night attack version, which makes up about a third of U.S. Harriers. The British planes also are night planes dedicated to air-ground attack, he said, and while both types carry Forward Looking Infrared sensors, neither is fitted with a multimode radar such as the APG-65 carried by U.S. AV-8B+ models.

The absence of the big radar, Nordeen said, makes the GR 9A and AV-8Bs “a better-performing plane. Weighing less, it’s more of a hot rod.”

British GR 9s, although upgraded with improved avionics and weapons, are powered by the Rolls-Royce Mark 105 Pegasus engine. GR 9As have the more powerful Mark 107, similar to the Rolls-Royce F402-RR-408s that power Marine AV-8Bs.

British and U.S. Harrier II aircraft had a high degree of commonality from their origin. The planes were developed and built in a joint arrangement between British Aerospace — now BAE Systems — and McDonnell Douglas, now a division of Boeing. While each company built its own wings, all forward sections of the British and American Harrier IIs were built by McDonnell in St. Louis, while British Aerospace built the fuselage sections aft of the cockpit.

“All the planes have to fit together,” Nordeen said.

The Harrier IIs, built between 1980 and 1995, “are still quite serviceable,” he said. “The aircraft are not that far apart. We’re taking advantage of all the money the Brits have spent on them. It’s like we’re buying a car with maybe 15,000 miles on it.”

Operationally, Nordeen said, “these are very good platforms. They need upgrades, but on bombing missions they have the ability to incorporate the Litening II targeting pod [used by U.S. aircraft]. They’re good platforms. And we’ve already got trained pilots.”

The Corps is planning on phasing out its Harriers by 2025, when replacement by F-35B Joint Strike Fighters should be complete.

Nordeen, however, said he expects the British Harriers to be used initially to replace two-seat Marine F-18D Hornet fighters now operated in the night attack role.

“The F-18Ds are more worn out than the Harriers,” Nordeen said. “Most of the conversions [of ex-British aircraft] early on will be to replace 18Ds and not Harriers.” He noted the first Marine F-35B squadron already is slated to replace an F-18D unit.


PS:It would be nice if the Nerpa/Chakra arrived in time for Navy Day.Perhaps its being timed as such?

venku_Raj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 14 Oct 2010 19:08

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby venku_Raj » 17 Nov 2011 10:04


arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arunsrinivasan » 17 Nov 2011 10:50

Philip wrote:"Opportunity knocks but once"! We have lost the opportunity to have had easy pickings of the UK's early retired Harriers,which could've been acquired at throwaway costs.I have been advocating this ver since the UK mothballed their Harriers.While many have derided the acquisition of them for the IN,particularly to serve in the Viraat and any future amphibioud flat tops,not so to an old experienced operator of the famous jump-jet,who have picked up the entire lot of 70+,lock,stock and barrrel.Who he? The USMC,who have acted wisely in order that they could preserve their amphibious air support capabilities since the JSF STOVL version might be dumped in the near future,leaving them without any VSTOL capability aboard their many amphibious flat tops.Even if we now want a few replacements to keep our numbers of aircraft on the Viraat healthy,it's too late.I'm not sure if any of the ex-RN Sea Harriers,which differ from the ex-RAF Harriers which were later used aboard RN carriers are also part of the deal.We will have to pick up some from other operators who are unlikely to sell.

PS:It would be nice if the Nerpa/Chakra arrived in time for Navy Day.Perhaps its being timed as such?


Agree with you, it does look like India missed a big opportunity here.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3411
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby suryag » 17 Nov 2011 11:12

PS:It would be nice if the Nerpa/Chakra arrived in time for Navy Day.Perhaps its being timed as such?


LCA NP1 should hopefully fly by Navy day

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Nov 2011 12:14

I think IN made right decision by skipping harriers. reasons being
- ADS1 and future CV will have CTOL/ski jump a/c with far better fuel fraction, performance and bringback than harriers (Mig29K, tejas, rafale-M/JSF)
- we are likely to get our 1st of four LHD not before 2020 at the rate things are going. thats 10 yrs away!
- Viraat is going to retire by 2014 for sure
- USMC can play around with harriers, because they swarms of land based a/c and F-18s for protection
- we have far better a/c for the IN should it choose to have a land based air arm - just produce 40 more super30 MKIs or get more Mig29K

I do not see the utility of harrier carriers vs TSP/PLAN. sure they can beat up a pack of maldivian or somali pirates but even a MMG off a Chetak heli can do that.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 307
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sohamn » 17 Nov 2011 13:23

^^^ I would disagree with Singha. Advantage with Harriers are as follows
-- No crew training required
-- No technitian training required
-- GR9s did have BVR capability
-- Viraat will not be decomissioned before 2018 ( likely date for Vikrant comission)
-- will provide excellent A2G capability and will also have a heavier weapon load than MIG29ks
-- Dirt Cheap
-- Proven capability
-- Can also work from Jalashva as well.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11231
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 17 Nov 2011 14:14

sohamn wrote:^^^ I would disagree with Singha. Advantage with Harriers are as follows
-- No crew training required1
-- No technitian training required2
-- GR9s did have BVR capability3
-- Viraat will not be decomissioned before 2018 ( likely date for Vikrant comission)
-- will provide excellent A2G capability and will also have a heavier weapon load than MIG29ks
-- Dirt Cheap4
-- Proven capability
-- Can also work from Jalashva as well.


1 and 2- These are not the same as FRS 51 and upgraded with Israeli Radars and Missles, there will be quiet a lot of training required as compared to the old fleet.

3- There was some American restriction on us buying AMRAAMs due to end use, CISAMOA etc.

4- The USD 50 million is only for spare parts, the cost to US (we would have been charged much higher) has still not yet been disclosed.

Me thinks the Navy did consider them, but looking at the issues involved decided against any acquisition of these Harriers.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby koti » 17 Nov 2011 14:20

The Harrier fleet however adaptable it is, will still be a defensive weapon.
What the IN needs now to raise its face is a very offensive platform, the one it can use to project its power.

What I was advocating all along are strong and offensive systems like the Tu22M3 and the Su34's.

Few months back, we had our dhotis shivered as the PLAN ships disrespected our vessels off Vietnam.
Let us exaggerate it and say that the PLAN vessel actually fired a couple of warning shells to further intimidate our vessel. What could we have done? I Know, register a STRONG protest with the Chinese Commissioner?

What could have we done? Fire warning shells at the PLAN vessel? Do we have enough platforms or enough logistics to support such an act. Or will we choose to swallow our shame and go on as if nothing happened.

Our sub fleet is at its low. And it is going to go further south this decade. What sort of a security can we offer against the now Massive PLAN?

However ambitious our Naval foresight might be, it is still time consuming and defensive.

Matching the PLAN ship to ship in our areas of interest is something out of IN's current scope. We need to strive for an asymmetric edge over the PLAN, like the Chinese AShBM's cutting the carrier threat considerably.
Imagine the confidence IN ships will get if they are under the umbrella of IN's potent air arm.

Imagine a squadron each of Su24's armed with Brahmos/Nirbhay and anti sub Klubs on stand by at eastern, western and the Andaman bases. Feeling good already, now mix a dozen Backfires in these areas.
Edit: Grammar
Last edited by koti on 17 Nov 2011 14:33, edited 2 times in total.

vishnu.nv
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 19:32

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vishnu.nv » 17 Nov 2011 14:27

Koti sir, you have just posted what i typed.

Couple of squadrons super MKI at Cochin, Vizag, Goa and A&N will do the trick. We may need Eight more squadrons. Hardly Half the price we spend on MRCA.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Nov 2011 16:00

MKI's dont have the range to scare the big boys in the deep ocean. they are again quite a defensive weapon based on land with a reach extending not beyond malacca and maldives. 6 hrs missions are very draining in fighters vs comfortable bomber cockpits.

if at all possible, we should get Russia to restart the Tu160 production line, customize the avionics and crew comforts for us and get ourself a fleet around 20 divided into 4 squadrons of 5 each as naval strike and strategic attack bombers under joint IAF-IN control using aviators and ground crew from both (keeps both happy wrt having the big stick).

they can be armed with nirbhay when available and brahmos-A and kh35 for now.

if the aborted A321MPA concept had taken off and been chosen for P8I, we might have been able to get them make the mods for internal bomb bay and brahmos/nirbhay carriage but Khan will never permit that for B737 so thats a dead end.

there is really no other option around unless we want to await the PAK-DA.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby koti » 17 Nov 2011 17:32

Though not impossible, this again is a long term perspective.

We however have a lot of T22M3's available.
Su34 is also a decent option. It has the long endurance(comfort) and also the payload capacity. Any modern Su can buddy refuel, so the range also can be substantially increased for these. Unlike strategic bombers, these won't ring bells once up. The maintenance cost will be pretty cheap compared to supersonic bombers and we can have these in numbers.
Unlike MKI, these IMO can carry two Brahmos or Klub missiles(Modified ofcourse).

Now again to the Backfire. All the above only north.


Pak-DA is too optimistic.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 17 Nov 2011 17:56

Philip wrote:PS:It would be nice if the Nerpa/Chakra arrived in time for Navy Day.Perhaps its being timed as such?


The transfer to Indian Crew at Russia was slated to happen on Nov 23-24 but dont hold your breath.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 955
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 17 Nov 2011 18:07

Milestone for Scorpene submarine construction
The construction of six submarines under the Scorpene project has achieved a milestone with the Mumbai-based Mazagon Dock Ltd (MDL) successfully integrating the weapons of the system with the main structure of the underwater vessel.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 17 Nov 2011 19:05

In a first, Japan offers to sell aircraft to India

In a sign of increasingly closer defence ties, Japan has for the first time offered to sell military equipment to India. While Tokyo has traditionally been wary of exporting military equipment to any part of the world, it has for the first time offered to sell multi-role amphibious aircraft that the Indian Navy needs for a variety of roles, including electronic warfare.

Sources said the matter was discussed during Defence Minister A K Antony’s visit to Japan last month and Tokyo expressed its keenness to share high-end military technology with India and even explore the possibility of joint development.

While the offer has been appreciated by India, which has identified key areas where defence technology can be shared, it has been conveyed that the amphibious aircraft would need to take part in competitive trials as per the procurement process. Unlike the US and Russia, where several defence deals have been signed without a global competition, India does not have any mechanism for direct government-government sales with Japan.

It is learnt that the Japanese government has granted permission to ShinMaywa Corporation to respond to a global request for information by the Indian Navy. Sources said the company has offered an aircraft named ShinMaywa SS 3 I in response to a Request for Information (RFI) issued by the Navy. Responses have also been received from Canada’s Bombardier and Russia’s Beriev company.

Japan has a strict policy on export of defence equipment and there is an unofficial ban on arms export despite the nation having a robust defence industry that caters for domestic needs. The ban, however, is being reconsidered with public statements in the past few months alluding to a modification in export policy. Tokyo is also considering opening up to joint ventures and joint developmental projects with other like-minded nations.

While co-development would be a step in the future, the offer of an amphibian plane is being seen as a sign of close military ties between the nations.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5454
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vishvak » 17 Nov 2011 19:44

vishnu.nv wrote:Koti sir, you have just posted what i typed.

Couple of squadrons super MKI at Cochin, Vizag, Goa and A&N will do the trick. We may need Eight more squadrons. Hardly Half the price we spend on MRCA.

My 2 paise onlee. The pumped up airbase at Diego Gracias, the Indian ocean - link.
Not too pumped up Indian airbase at car nicobar: link.
Last edited by vishvak on 17 Nov 2011 23:15, edited 2 times in total.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 17 Nov 2011 19:50

The major IN expansion cannot come before 2020. As the economy needed to support the same does not exists. But by that time it may well be too late as the PLAN may have taken an insurmountable lead against India.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby koti » 17 Nov 2011 21:17

Asymmetric!!!

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 17 Nov 2011 21:58

^^^

it is one of the possible ways of doing things and you dont really need to get asymetric in the IOR. But when it comes to protecting the assets owned by the Indian commercial enterprise located extra regionally. You will need to have capability to deal with the PLAN and PLAAF on a head to head basis.

Counting on the US or some one else is some thing that India ought not do.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 18 Nov 2011 07:21

Pratyush wrote:The major IN expansion cannot come before 2020. As the economy needed to support the same does not exists. But by that time it may well be too late as the PLAN may have taken an insurmountable lead against India.


Very defeatist attitude.

"This is God sent. The more US ramps up its military presence in South China Sea, the more it will divert Beijing's attention from India," he said.

"It can actually mean a big saving on investments being made on the China border. B

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 770868.cms

Nobody has to do it alone. Capiche?

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1840
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby uddu » 18 Nov 2011 07:53


Very interesting development. A change in attitude from the Japanese towards Indians.
This step is a very small step. What's expected of Japanese is the Soryu class subs for Project 75I. Nothing less of that will boost our strategic relationship in a better way.
http://www.military-today.com/navy/sory ... images.htm
http://m3i.nobody.jp/military/soryumenu.html
http://homepage2.nifty.com/nishidah/e/dtc0212.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C5%8Dry% ... _submarine
With just 4 years of construction time, around two be build in Japan and the remaining four in Indian Shipyard. All the subs be modified with Indians systems, weaponry and our own AIP.
Once the first six is completed, we can start mass production of 12 more subs with modifications.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 09:12

>> What's expected of Japanese is the Soryu class subs for Project 75I. Nothing less of that will boost our strategic relationship in a better way.

+2 sire. we need Soryu. we need Soryu.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 18 Nov 2011 10:52

Cosmo_R wrote:Very defeatist attitude.

SNIP..........


Nobody has to do it alone. Capiche?


India's strategic situation is such that it must go it alone. No amount of smooth talking by any one is going to change that. Can one really expect the one power which is actively doing all it can to constrain and weaken India in the west will actually support India and its interests in the east. Especially when the power on the west can be reasonably expected to involve it self against India. When India is dealing with the Dragon on its east.

India must develop the ability to deal with its enemies on its own. It has no god fathers, who will back it up.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 18 Nov 2011 10:55

Singha wrote:>> What's expected of Japanese is the Soryu class subs for Project 75I. Nothing less of that will boost our strategic relationship in a better way.

+2 sire. we need Soryu. we need Soryu.


The ship seems to be good desigl, but it lacks the ability to shoot the Bramhos, Which IIRC, is one of the prime requirements of the P75I. If that requirement is ignored, then I am all for this class of sub.

Along with the new, air enable destroyers of the JMSDF. :P

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3789
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 18 Nov 2011 11:02

koti wrote:Though not impossible, this again is a long term perspective.

We however have a lot of T22M3's available.
Su34 is also a decent option. It has the long endurance(comfort) and also the payload capacity. Any modern Su can buddy refuel, so the range also can be substantially increased for these. Unlike strategic bombers, these won't ring bells once up. The maintenance cost will be pretty cheap compared to supersonic bombers and we can have these in numbers.
Unlike MKI, these IMO can carry two Brahmos or Klub missiles(Modified ofcourse).

Now again to the Backfire. All the above only north.


Pak-DA is too optimistic.


+1. Although not as potent as the Tu-22; the Su-34 is certainly worth a thought. The MKI could also be modded heavily to come close to the Su-34 but the side by side cockpit layout and crew comfort measures on the Su-34 are supposed to be rather stellar - definitely more bomber than fighter but plenty of oomph if it comes to A2A battles.

Still, imho a supersonic bomber is in a class of its own. A nifty and not so expensive check to Chinese Carrier ambitions apart from other roles. With double the range/payload of a fullback, the reach is truly strategic.

Cm

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16825
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 18 Nov 2011 11:06

Pratyush wrote:The major IN expansion cannot come before 2020. As the economy needed to support the same does not exists. But by that time it may well be too late as the PLAN may have taken an insurmountable lead against India.

as I keep repeating, china has at best marginal lead over IN, if that. there is no way in hell that would become an insurmountable lead by 2020.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Nov 2011 11:27

See no reason why we cant convert the Su-30MK into a dedicated maritime role ( the russian are buying 12 Su-30SM for dedicated NavalRole ). Such land based aircraft can provide decent anti-ship missile capability when armed with Brahmos,Klub or Nirbhay over 300 to 1000 Km arc , over and above 1500 km range of Su-30MKI ,plus they are quite capable of defending themself against what ever the chinese can throw. If you still need longer range you can always plumb 2000L drop tank in the center or have 3 Wet Pylons for flexibility.

Its a good deterrent against Chinese carrier entering IN sphere of influence.

We really do not need a Tu-22M3 or Tu-160 its really a cold war beast thats best avoided due to expensive maintenance and a small fleet makes it much harder to maintain.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 11:34

you want to play commerce raiding and hitting coastal infra targets in the indo-china sea from malaysia upward there is no alternative to the Tu160 in the air. TINA.

we have gone over this tiresome demand to put brahmos in every vessel from a harbour tug upward. imo SSKs are better off being small, chankian and low footprint to fight in the shallow waters of the andaman sea and indo-china sea where depth is rarely more than 100m per reports on brf. if the idea is to attack ships, torpedoes, harpoon asm and klubs are more than enough.
if the idea is to attack coastal infra targets, I am afraid the small number of tubes a SSK could mount (max six to eight) is hardly enough to disable a single refinery or thermal plant due to the spread out nature of such projects.

we need to bide out time on this and wait for torpedo tube launched nirbhay. meantime the tube launched land attack version of Klub is enough for dolittle type psyops pinpricks.

only a proper SSGN with the ability to unload say 30 nirbhay could hope to cause considerable damage in a single sortie. thats arihant size and far bigger than any SSK.

Soryu as - is should be fine for IN - good long range endurance, good torpedo/ASM fit , and we can play around with sensors...being big, maybe it can even humpback marcos delivery vehicle and small team of 6-8 marcos in some comfort. minor mods like adding Klub and nirbhay can be done.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Nov 2011 12:01

A nuclear power SSGN armed with volley of cruise missile is a better and stealthier option and something we can do on our own , rather then depending on the mythical blackjack and then depending for every nut bolt and spares from Russia that never reaches on time.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 12:16

both have their uses. among 20 blackjacks you might have 10 available and loaded for bear any given day.
among 3 SSGN, you might have 1-2 available but 1500km away when the yellow matter hits fan.

amirkhan has 50 nuke boats , so they are comfortably having atleast 3-5 prowling the western pacific always.

a blackjack can also run away at around mach2 after unloading its stores .... SSGN might still need to deal with lurking ASW/SSN forces deployed to screen the area.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests