Indian Naval Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Ashutosh Malik
BRFite
Posts: 121
Joined: 07 Mar 2009 18:47

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ashutosh Malik » 13 Aug 2009 12:03

I think Admiral Mehta has done wonders by being honest and presenting the challenges as they are. That is what professionals are for. And hopefully we will have similar professionals coming up in the future as well. Having 'yes men" in any organisation is the surest way of leading that organisation to destruction. So also with nations.

I believe something like this happened in case of the Sumdorong Chu valley incident in 1986 when the civilian bureaucrats were trying to second guess Gen. Sundaji and wanted him to back-off. He didn't and the Chinese learnt a significant lesson. Tragedy of course seems to be that we don't remember the lessons that we should be learning.

Best regards,

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby RayC » 13 Aug 2009 12:11

Admiral Mehta is right statistically and India in a stand alone mode.

However, it is a moot point that the Chinese can be assertive given the global situation and that is what counts!

His is a wake up call to be assertive without a 'little help from friends'!

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 13 Aug 2009 12:13

when it is difficult to stand toe-to-toe and punch your opponent on
level terms, its time to change the game
- go asymmetric (musashi, sun tzu, chanakya)
- use the opponents bulk, speed and momentum against himself (judo)

cyber warfare, oscar2 salvos knocking out the 10 biggest coastal power plants in the mainland, dropping key coal supply bridges over big rivers ....we need not focus on just the narrow border zone which is ejatly when the panda wants.

once we get into mental block and refuse to think outside the box the battle is half over and we are holding the losing hand.

this is precisely what PRC imposed in 1962 when IAF was not given permission to lend a hand.

sinkiang, tibet, yunnan, lanzhou...hard outer shell of panda...hit him
there he doesnt care, the residents are also considered expendable.

strike the heart of the beast, the belly of the beast, the ego and pride of the beast. once you decide to escalate dont hold back - go for the jaguar vein or fall trying. dont strike a couple of apologetic blows in the panda's nuts and then shrink back watching how he reacts.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4770
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 13 Aug 2009 12:20

I think Admiral Mehta has done wonders by being honest and presenting the challenges as they are. That is what professionals are for. And hopefully we will have similar professionals coming up in the future as well. Having 'yes men" in any organisation is the surest way of leading that organisation to destruction. So also with nations.

Does anyone relly think an admiral in the Indian Navy can make such a statement, independently of the government of India? Has it ever been done publically before?

There is more to this than apparent. Perhaps the old good cop/bad cop or advanced nuclear submarine/abjectly mewling India scenario.

Ted Kotcheff
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 02:54

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ted Kotcheff » 13 Aug 2009 12:30

Singha wrote:go for the jaguar vein

:rotfl:

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17064
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 13 Aug 2009 12:35


abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby abhiti » 13 Aug 2009 16:59

kit wrote:"In military terms, both conventional and non-conventional, we neither have the capability nor the intention to match China, force for force."

while India could not catch up with China militarily, it should aim to level the playing field as much as possible.


Answer - nuclear weapons and hoardes of them. Nukes is what America used to ward of Russia when it had zillion weapons. Nukes is what Russia now uses to ward of US directly attacking Russia. Nukes is what India should use to ward of China attacking India. But then 100 nukes make no difference. We need to have enough to decimate China for the nuke threat to have carry any weight.

yossarian
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 35
Joined: 07 Jun 2009 06:52

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby yossarian » 13 Aug 2009 18:16

The true answer is a fully operational BMD system (accelerate the development and induction of PAD and AAD). I think in the current state of affairs, a BMD with WMD is the true deterrent. Stockpiling nuclear weapons can only achieve MAD policy... which might not be enough...

Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3420
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Tanaji » 13 Aug 2009 18:46

abhiti wrote:
kit wrote:"In military terms, both conventional and non-conventional, we neither have the capability nor the intention to match China, force for force."

while India could not catch up with China militarily, it should aim to level the playing field as much as possible.


Answer - nuclear weapons and hoardes of them. Nukes is what America used to ward of Russia when it had zillion weapons. Nukes is what Russia now uses to ward of US directly attacking Russia. Nukes is what India should use to ward of China attacking India. But then 100 nukes make no difference. We need to have enough to decimate China for the nuke threat to have carry any weight.


:roll:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 13 Aug 2009 20:02


Ashutosh Malik
BRFite
Posts: 121
Joined: 07 Mar 2009 18:47

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ashutosh Malik » 13 Aug 2009 22:49

Does anyone relly think an admiral in the Indian Navy can make such a statement, independently of the government of India? Has it ever been done publically before?

There is more to this than apparent. Perhaps the old good cop/bad cop or advanced nuclear submarine/abjectly mewling India scenario.


I am not too sure whether we can rule that out, i.e. making a statement independently of GOI. This has been done earlier by others and Admiral Mehta is known to speak. Brig Ray also mentioned that.

Anyhow, my point is not that. There can be two possibilities:
1) He has spoken on his own - which is great. Can lead to a debate. Can be a message.
2) GOI has planned this and therefore is sending a message. In that case its even better. Maybe some spine is emerging vis-a-vis China.

Bottomline, since we have always been status quoist as a nation, it takes long to get things moving. If the second option is correct things may be moving ahead. If the first option is true then it is a good message.

Best regards

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4700
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 13 Aug 2009 22:58

when it is difficult to stand toe-to-toe and punch your opponent on
level terms, its time to change the game
- go asymmetric (musashi, sun tzu, chanakya)
- use the opponents bulk, speed and momentum against himself (judo)

cyber warfare, oscar2 salvos knocking out the 10 biggest coastal power plants in the mainland, dropping key coal supply bridges over big rivers ....we need not focus on just the narrow border zone which is ejatly when the panda wants.

once we get into mental block and refuse to think outside the box the battle is half over and we are holding the losing hand.

this is precisely what PRC imposed in 1962 when IAF was not given permission to lend a hand.

sinkiang, tibet, yunnan, lanzhou...hard outer shell of panda...hit him
there he doesnt care, the residents are also considered expendable.

strike the heart of the beast, the belly of the beast, the ego and pride of the beast. once you decide to escalate dont hold back - go for the jaguar vein or fall trying. dont strike a couple of apologetic blows in the panda's nuts and then shrink back watching how he reacts.


Dammit, Why isn't this man in the PMO"s office, someplace where it matters? Singhaji for PM! :twisted:

CM.
Last edited by Cain Marko on 14 Aug 2009 01:34, edited 1 time in total.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2762
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 14 Aug 2009 00:01

Cain Marko wrote:
when it is difficult to stand toe-to-toe and punch your opponent on
level terms, its time to change the game
- go asymmetric (musashi, sun tzu, chanakya)
- use the opponents bulk, speed and momentum against himself (judo)


Dammint, Why isn't this man in the PMO"s office, someplace where it matters? Singhaji for PM! :twisted:

CM.


Also, lets not forget Nathu La - 1967, where we whipped the Chinese asses there - killed more than 200 of the endangered Pandas :D

Was reading this New Yorker article a couple of days ago. Quotes interesting stats about how frequently David beats Goliath in wars over the last 200 years.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/11/090511fa_fact_gladwell

An excerpt from this article (which highlights Singha's point):

The political scientist Ivan Arreguín-Toft recently looked at every war fought in the past two hundred years between strong and weak combatants. The Goliaths, he found, won in 71.5 per cent of the cases. That is a remarkable fact. Arreguín-Toft was analyzing conflicts in which one side was at least ten times as powerful—in terms of armed might and population—as its opponent, and even in those lopsided contests the underdog won almost a third of the time.


What happened, Arreguín-Toft wondered, when the underdogs likewise acknowledged their weakness and chose an unconventional strategy? He went back and re-analyzed his data. In those cases, David’s winning percentage went from 28.5 to 63.6. When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath’s rules, they win, Arreguín-Toft concluded, “even when everything we think we know about power says they shouldn’t.”

satya
BRFite
Posts: 718
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby satya » 14 Aug 2009 01:07

Admiral Mehta's speech was followed by an article in Mail Today ( i guess wednesday or tuesday's ) by a Senior Fellow of IDSA on PRC. GoI doesn't allow Defense Chiefs airing their view independently in media without prior permission , it may appear so but its never the case. Both had approvals .

A naive thought : what sort of strategy or even tactic is discussed openly & loudly ? One that's neither


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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Aug 2009 06:57

once a great swordsman and Musashi got into a war of words and challenged to a contest. On the appointed day the swordsman and his group went to the field and waited. they waited and waited but Musashi did not come. A couple hours passed and he grew increasingly frustrated. he sent a assistant to the inn where his opponent was staying to find out if he had run away. instead the assistant came back and reported that M was soundly asleep when he arrived and asked him to go tell his master to wait there until M had a good meal, washed up and came to fight :oops: this so upset the guy he finally lost in short order when M showed up with a casual air.

Lesson: long before you fight, hit the enemy's pride, make him wait, ignore him, run psyops on him, frustrate him when all he wants is a quick stand up fight, make him worry all sorts of things about your chankian motives. M had already studied this
weakness and exploited it.

In another contest, one guy said beforehand 'I really fear your right hand, it so skillfull'. as the contest went on, the guy found himself thinking more and more about the right hand and becoming more and more aware of its moves, trying to justify the alleged skills of his right hand. he lost his natural reactive flow and started thinking too much during the fight.
needless to say he got felled by an attack on his left.

every brfite should read atleast the compact version of this book (150/-) if not the
full version 450/-

http://www.33strategiesofwar.net/
http://www.getabstract.com/summary/5022 ... f-war.html

Prepare. or be swept aside in the critical hour.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3620
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Paul » 16 Aug 2009 07:00

Interesting blog in a PRC blog : They do accept that Shivaliks and other newer IN battleships are very capable but are questioning the costs.

For those keeping scores at home, it's around $10 billion for 7 ships or around $1.4 billion per ship. This is an increase over the original announcement in 2006 that put the price tag of each ship at around $900 million. I think India has had some experiences recently with cost escalations in naval projects. They want to make sure to allocate all the necessary funding, so that it does not have cost overrun this time.

To put this into perspective:
A 054A costs around $200-250 million depending on the conversion rate.
I think Singapore paid $1 billion for 6 Formidable class ships back in early 2000s, although that only includes the ToT, weapon systems and the first unit.
The first batch of Talwar cost $1 billion for 3
The second batch of Talwar cost $1.6 billion for 3 (although a lot of that is due to USD depreciation)
The Project 17 Shivalik class apparently costs $650 million each
The most recent order of 4 FREMM class by Italy cost 1.4 billion EUR -> 350 million EUR per or about 500 million USD depending on the conversion we use.
The entire horizon class program cost around $4 billion for 4 ships
KDX-3 is around $900 million
The 6 Type-45 destroyers cost UK 6.46 billion pound, which is anywhere from 8 to 10 billion USD depending on the conversion rate.

It looks like the going rate for a modern stealthy frigate with medium range air defense and good ASW capabilities is around $500 million. The going rate for a larger AAW ship with area defense is around $1 to 1.5 billion.

With the price that India is willing to pay for these 7 ships, it should turn out to be a very capable ship. If you look at the specifications of Shivalik class, its weapon and sensor fit is similar to your average modern frigate like the La Fayette derivatives, Talwar and 054A. $650 million looks to be more than what the other countries paid for comparable frigates, but I think part of the cost goes toward improving Indian shipyard to be able to handle such projects in the future. With more than double the cost, Project 17A looks like it will be a whole different beast. Just looking at the price tag alone, it looks to be an AAW ship with long range SAM and Aegis like combat system. On the other hand, I kept reading Indian sources that said this ship will only be around 5600 ton in displacement. That would make sense because larger Project 17A class would intrude in the territories of Project 15A, which is in the 7000 ton range. Even now, it seems that Project 15A is really not that relevant when the smaller Project 17A might turn out to do the same job much better. So, I think it would be interesting to see what Project 17A turn out to be. If it turns out to be like Horizon class or AAW version of FREMM, it would be well worth the money after we factor in higher than projected inflation, cost of upgrading the shipyards, transfer of technology and such. However, if it turns out to just be a more powerful version of Project 17, I think they are really paying far too much for these ships.
Posted by Feng at 5:31 PM

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2561
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 16 Aug 2009 07:40

n
Paul wrote:Interesting blog in a PRC blog : They do accept that Shivaliks and other newer IN battleships are very capable but are questioning the costs.

For those keeping scores at home, it's around $10 billion for 7 ships or around $1.4 billion per ship. This is an increase over the original announcement in 2006 that put the price tag of each ship at around $900 million. I think India has had some experiences recently with cost escalations in naval projects. They want to make sure to allocate all the necessary funding, so that it does not have cost overrun this time.

To put this into perspective:
A 054A costs around $200-250 million depending on the conversion rate.
I think Singapore paid $1 billion for 6 Formidable class ships back in early 2000s, although that only includes the ToT, weapon systems and the first unit.
The first batch of Talwar cost $1 billion for 3
The second batch of Talwar cost $1.6 billion for 3 (although a lot of that is due to USD depreciation)
The Project 17 Shivalik class apparently costs $650 million each
The most recent order of 4 FREMM class by Italy cost 1.4 billion EUR -> 350 million EUR per or about 500 million USD depending on the conversion we use.
The entire horizon class program cost around $4 billion for 4 ships
KDX-3 is around $900 million
The 6 Type-45 destroyers cost UK 6.46 billion pound, which is anywhere from 8 to 10 billion USD depending on the conversion rate.

It looks like the going rate for a modern stealthy frigate with medium range air defense and good ASW capabilities is around $500 million. The going rate for a larger AAW ship with area defense is around $1 to 1.5 billion.

With the price that India is willing to pay for these 7 ships, it should turn out to be a very capable ship. If you look at the specifications of Shivalik class, its weapon and sensor fit is similar to your average modern frigate like the La Fayette derivatives, Talwar and 054A. $650 million looks to be more than what the other countries paid for comparable frigates, but I think part of the cost goes toward improving Indian shipyard to be able to handle such projects in the future. With more than double the cost, Project 17A looks like it will be a whole different beast. Just looking at the price tag alone, it looks to be an AAW ship with long range SAM and Aegis like combat system. On the other hand, I kept reading Indian sources that said this ship will only be around 5600 ton in displacement. That would make sense because larger Project 17A class would intrude in the territories of Project 15A, which is in the 7000 ton range. Even now, it seems that Project 15A is really not that relevant when the smaller Project 17A might turn out to do the same job much better. So, I think it would be interesting to see what Project 17A turn out to be. If it turns out to be like Horizon class or AAW version of FREMM, it would be well worth the money after we factor in higher than projected inflation, cost of upgrading the shipyards, transfer of technology and such. However, if it turns out to just be a more powerful version of Project 17, I think they are really paying far too much for these ships.
Posted by Feng at 5:31 PM


Few mistakes; RSN formidable class costs more than 500 million per vessel (even the RoC paid close to those figures for their la fayette vessels a decade ago) according to RSN sources no actual figures released. While the 54A has some RCS reduction, it doesn't incoporate any noise/ir reduction plus EW/ECM, combat management system and sonar suite is inferior to the vessel he is comparing to, but i doubt that alone one make it that much cheaper than the other vessels.

Especially when PSN's F22 frigates are said to be around 200+ million (china absorbed part of the cost and PN only has to pay 4-750 mill) so a frigate thats half the size and far lightly armed vessel costs as much as Type 54A (which doesn't make any sense). Unless they are quoting the cost of the vessel without its armaments or electronic suite.

As for Shivalik's cost overruns not surprising considering all the delays and the size of the vessel it grew into, nearly 5600 (latest) ton displacement vs 4000 for Talwar/054A. While it is fairly modern its design is still based on the vintage Krivak III. Much better of starting from scratch with newer smaller design which can carry far more VLS cells.

Added his figures on FREMM also seem to be incorrect the quoted cost is 10 for 5680 million euros and first two will cost 1250 million. Most people expect it to cost around $ 1 billion/each for first two vessel when it gets built (after cost overruns).

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21227
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Aug 2009 18:27

With the doubt reg. delays in building our warships Indian yards,I truly wonder whether even the high budgetary figures will be met.Tell me which major India defence project has not had massive cost escalation? One option is to design a warship here and get it built in Russia,where two major objectives will be met.Quick building-as seen with the Talwars and secrecy maintained of our design.It is perhaps why the GOI/MOD was reluctant to get the first two ships (P-17As) built abroad for compromising their design.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2561
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 17 Aug 2009 20:34

Philip wrote:With the doubt reg. delays in building our warships Indian yards,I truly wonder whether even the high budgetary figures will be met.Tell me which major India defence project has not had massive cost escalation? One option is to design a warship here and get it built in Russia,where two major objectives will be met.Quick building-as seen with the Talwars and secrecy maintained of our design.It is perhaps why the GOI/MOD was reluctant to get the first two ships (P-17As) built abroad for compromising their design.


Well the problem with building it in Russian shipyard is, they are reluctant to use foreign vendors for weapons/radars etc. Russian manufacturers in other hand offer discounts for BZ or Yantar for Shtil,Fregat,Gas turbines etc when they built Talwar FFGs; which is where they make their profit. Along with reluctance from western companies such GE, IAI, Rafael to allow Russian access to their tech. So such a venture would be unlikely.

Also there is misconception that cheap labor force will lead to far lower cost for a military vessel (it is true for cargo ships), most of the cost is the weaponry and sensors. Beats me how IN/GoI expected to build a vessel larger than Talwar at cheaper price at MDL.

Going ahead IN has to incorporate a design freeze and not modify or make changes to the vessel configuration when the hull is already close to completion. Also put in penalties for any delay and need to have more SYs that can build 5000+ ton surface combatants not just MDL.

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 447
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby aditp » 17 Aug 2009 21:05

Did any one note, INS Virat has completed its refit.

maz
Webmaster BR
Posts: 353
Joined: 03 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby maz » 18 Aug 2009 00:09

interview with CNS
http://www.thehindu.com/2009/08/12/stor ... 290900.htm

CNS reviews Eastern Fleet

http://www.thehindu.com/2009/08/13/stor ... 990200.htm

INS Vagli : 35 yrs

http://www.vizagcityonline.com/snapshots/snapshots.html

Commissioned on 10th August, 1974 at Riga in former USSR, the submarine is one of the eight submarines of Foxtrot class inducted between 1971 and 1974. Most of these have been decommissioned after long and distinguished service. INS Vagli is the only submarine of the class still in active service and one of the oldest operational submarines in the world.

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 18 Aug 2009 01:27

Indian Aircraft Carrier Back in Service in a Month
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=SEA

Navy likely to get new diesel submarines
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Navy- ... nes/503168

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8207
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nachiket » 18 Aug 2009 05:42

sanjaychoudhry wrote:
Navy likely to get new diesel submarines
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Navy- ... nes/503168


Hope they insist on the first 2 of the series to be manufactured in the supplying country instead of India. Don't need another Scorpene style delay.

atma
BRFite
Posts: 169
Joined: 04 Jun 2006 23:37
Location: Frozen Tundra

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby atma » 18 Aug 2009 06:54

sanjaychoudhry wrote:

Navy likely to get new diesel submarines
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Navy- ... nes/503168

Hope they insist on the first 2 of the series to be manufactured in the supplying country instead of India. Don't need another Scorpene style delay.



You can only hope.... after a while on BR, you get numbed and get used to the inordinate delays. :cry: May be moved to the whine thread.

m mittal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 93
Joined: 20 Sep 2008 12:08
Location: Timbuktu

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby m mittal » 18 Aug 2009 08:45

From the link

Indian Aircraft Carrier Back in Service in a Month
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=SEA

I found this snippet:
The Navy's long-term plans include a blue water force with SIX aircraft carriers and improvements in littoral warfare capabilities.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21227
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 18 Aug 2009 13:20

In continuation of John's post,and the others on the longevity of the Viraat and the Vagli,there is a lesson to be learnt here.One is that carriers,being flattops stay contemporary by operating more modern aircraft as time goes by.Similarly,warships can stay contemporary by upgrades of sensos and weaponry (missiles) replacing older ones.The Rajput Brahmos upgrade is one in particular.With universal missile silos/launchers,as we're seeing on the ATV,future more capable missiles can be accomodated in such modular silos.Stealth however poses a problem,in that new tech and new building techniques ar required for modern warships.

The Vagli's longevity is unique though,as subs are very difficult to modernise or upgrade,and one must pay the IN a great tribute here.These subs have been in the past the ones used for trials of new sonars,etc.,and therefore still have a role to play at elast in a coastal defence role apart from training sub crews.One siincerely hopes that the IN's second line of subs gets going quickly,as we're seeing huge threats emerging in he neighbourhood.The arrival of a Malaysian Scorpene at Cochin only highlights how nations that did not even operate subs before,have now stolen a march over us,as we are yet to build/acquire our first Scorpene!

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2151
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kakarat » 18 Aug 2009 18:33


K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 963
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 18 Aug 2009 19:27

^ Same article on Ajai shukla's blog
Images of the article
Image
Image
Image
Large size image links on the blog.
Hope this issue is resolved fast.

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Willy » 18 Aug 2009 19:50

Where will the second line be built? MDL is busy building the scorpenes.Vizag is busy building the Atv's. Maybe L&T? That would be a big boost for the private sector if true. To build a major warship.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vavinash » 18 Aug 2009 21:20

Philip, the malaysian scorpenes were built in france right? I don't think they are as customized as IN ones. But MDl needs to get its act together.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8207
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nachiket » 18 Aug 2009 21:30

Willy wrote:Where will the second line be built? MDL is busy building the scorpenes.Vizag is busy building the Atv's. Maybe L&T? That would be a big boost for the private sector if true. To build a major warship.


Local manufacture of the second line would have to be started after all scorpenes have been delivered IMO.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby pankajs » 18 Aug 2009 21:51

nachiket wrote:
Willy wrote:Where will the second line be built? MDL is busy building the scorpenes.Vizag is busy building the Atv's. Maybe L&T? That would be a big boost for the private sector if true. To build a major warship.


Local manufacture of the second line would have to be started after all scorpenes have been delivered IMO.

That will delay the Navy's plans. There will have to be another alternative.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2561
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 19 Aug 2009 03:46

vavinash wrote:Philip, the malaysian scorpenes were built in france right? I don't think they are as customized as IN ones. But MDl needs to get its act together.

It is fairly similar to Chile/Malaysian version, for what i understand the delay has been blamed on DCN which according to MDL has been slow to transfer tech and parts for scorpene and France supposedly jacking up the cost. Current cost for 6 scorpene submarines is marked down at ~ 18.5k crores and only 9% of first vessel completed as of Dec 08. I would be happy if we even meet the 2012 deadline. OT but another reason not to go with Rafale for MRCA :roll:

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby abhiti » 19 Aug 2009 05:46

yossarian wrote:The true answer is a fully operational BMD system (accelerate the development and induction of PAD and AAD). I think in the current state of affairs, a BMD with WMD is the true deterrent. Stockpiling nuclear weapons can only achieve MAD policy... which might not be enough...


So far world super powers Russia, China, and America have all depended on MAD in various times/ forms to prevent superior force from taking you out. BMD capability is a new and untested capability. Even US admits it will not mature for a long time to come. Also real BMD technology is airborne laser which we don't have. So not going to happen in short term.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rony » 19 Aug 2009 08:21

Meanwhile in Maldives....
People’s Majlis on Monday rejected an urgent motion submitted by Kuludhufushi South member Mohamed Nasheed aimed at highlighting the concern’s of the public over articles published in two Indian newspapers about Maldives being brought within the Indian security grid.

When the chair called for votes, whether to debate the motion on the floor or throw out the motion, some 46 members voted against debating the motion and six members voted in favor of debating the motion while one member abstained.

The motion, based on articles carried on Indian newspapers, Indian Express on 13 August and The Hindu on 14 August as well as information obtained from Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF), stated that Indian defense agency have indicated that protecting the territory of the Maldives would soon be their responsibility. And that the motion was submitted as an urgent issue as an agreement of the as described in the Indian media can have serious implications on the country’s constitution, its independence and territorial integrity.

MP Nasheed , who was the legal reform minister during President Gayoom’s last term in office , wrote in the motion , that the articles published by Indian media indicated that Indian Navy were to install radars in the islands of Maldives and intended to carry out surveillance of Maldivian territorial waters , by connecting these radars to a larger Indian radar system and two Indian coast guard helicopters and two Indian Navy Dornier Aircrafts were to be positioned in Maldives to patrol and carry out surveillance of airspace and territorial space of Maldives.

Kulhudhuhfushi South member Nasheed wrote in the motion that such an arrangement requires specific Majlis approval if Indians or any other foreign power are to be involved inside the Maldives territory for any military purposes as called for in Article 251 of the constitution.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4700
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 19 Aug 2009 08:44

I would be happy if we even meet the 2012 deadline. OT but another reason not to go with Rafale for MRCA :roll:

Unfortunately this statement does seem to hold some truth. Check how slowly the M2k upgrade moves as well. Buggers were going to take 3 years to get the first a/c online to dash 5 stds! If they plan to produce rafales at that rate, it is something the IAF will seriously have to look into. Ditto with the Project 17A.

CM.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4700
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 19 Aug 2009 08:56

sanjaychoudhry wrote:Indian Aircraft Carrier Back in Service in a Month
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=SEA


From the above article this caught my eye for sure:
The aircraft carrier also has been fitted with the Israeli Barak air defense system and the anti-ship cruise missile BrahMos.


Is this for real or are they making the viraat a bit of a missile cruiser type? Esp. since they have only about 8 Shars now (all upgraded to LUSH stds by now I hope).

CM.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 19 Aug 2009 09:23

Cain Marko wrote:
sanjaychoudhry wrote:Indian Aircraft Carrier Back in Service in a Month
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=SEA


From the above article this caught my eye for sure:
The aircraft carrier also has been fitted with the Israeli Barak air defense system and the anti-ship cruise missile BrahMos.


Is this for real or are they making the viraat a bit of a missile cruiser type? Esp. since they have only about 8 Shars now (all upgraded to LUSH stds by now I hope).

CM.


Missile cruiser Gorky becomes Aircraft Carrier and Aircraft Carrier Viraat becomes Missile Cruiser/Aircraft Carrier..heh..:mrgreen:

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4700
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 19 Aug 2009 09:52

Missile cruiser Gorky becomes Aircraft Carrier and Aircraft Carrier Viraat becomes Missile Cruiser/Aircraft Carrier..heh..:mrgreen:

Mamla ekdum onetokaphor hai bhai, public samjhayla nahi hai! :mrgreen:

CM


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests