Indian Naval Discussion

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 21 Apr 2010 21:33

But the L&T did build the Arihant for the navy didn't it?

Doesn't Godrej build the PSLVs and the GSLVs (Including the cryogenic engine) for ISRO?

These guys have been at it and doing high quality stuff for ages. Its just that GoI doesn't go overboard at giving them contracts.

One aspect is that PSU making money (or not), the minister in charge of that PSU must contribute to his and his party's coffers of he's not going to get the party ticket in the next elections.
For the netas and the babus, the PSU is the hen that lays the golden egg - both financial and by means of votes.

John · Post by **John** » 21 Apr 2010 21:46

Brahmananda wrote:guys the p-28 can launch 8 Klub missiles very quickly? but how many do they carry on board? can some one give me some info as to how many such Klub/ Brahmos missiles are carried on board our frigates, destroyers at any given point.

P-28 does not have any launchers for Klub so its carries 0

. As for how many Brahmos/Klub are carried; the ship only carry the missiles in their vls launchers. So Talwar only has 8 Klub missiles.

Brahmananda · Post by **Brahmananda** » 21 Apr 2010 21:57

but wasnt the p-28 slated to recieve the klub-N? so the Talwar only carries 8 missiles in its launchers, no extras on board?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Apr 2010 22:00

VLS ships don't carry reloads like the older monster russian ships. VLS itself ensures the most optimum use of space so there is no need for reloads.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 21 Apr 2010 22:01

LIVEFIST:
PHOTOS: More Of India's First Indigenous Stealth Frigate Shivalik

John · Post by **John** » 21 Apr 2010 22:03

Brahmananda wrote:but wasnt the p-28 slated to recieve the klub-N? so the Talwar only carries 8 missiles in its launchers, no extras on board?

None of models of P-28 displayed it with Klub, as for the speculation of Klub it originated from an article which incorrectly mentioned P-28 as being based on Russia's Steregushchy Corvette.

Well it can carry more on its storage some where but you need a crane to reload them.
.

VLS ships don't carry reloads like the older monster russian ships. VLS itself ensures the most optimum use of space so there is no need for reloads.

Not the case with smaller missiles, extra rounds of Barak missiles are carried on board (atleast by Israeli vessels from what i understand) and can be reloaded in sea. Won't be surprised if IN does the same one (atleast in Viraat).

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 22 Apr 2010 00:35

David Siegel wrote: Nope, it is not a matter of lack of self-esteem or confidence neither I believe that people would have cribbed if the situation got mirror-imaged

Trust me they would. This

is a periodic one on B-R ever since B-R came to life more than a decade back.

This is the first time it was applied to amphib. troops...usually we apply it to scooter helmets and such gear. In the end it is all about what works and what doesn't - whether looks pretty is secondary.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 22 Apr 2010 04:15

Eat dosa, sink enemy

New Delhi, April 21: India’s first warship with a chapati-maker and a dosa-maker on board is scheduled to be commissioned next week, signalling that the naval headquarters has decided to put crew-comfort on its list of priorities along with firepower.

The modular furnishings in crew quarters — designed for the navy by a private company in the business — will also allow for modifications should the government, at a later date, change policy and allow women on board warships. Women’s quarters would have attached toilets.
...
...
“We have modular accommodation for the crew which will mean more comfortable and hygienic living conditions,” the director-general of the Naval Design Directorate, Rear Admiral K.N. Vaidyanathan, said here. Vaidyanathan has been with the project since its designing began in 2000.
...
Like every other piece of equipment on board, the chapati-maker and the dosa-maker have been configured to remain steady despite the rolling and the pitching of the ship as it sails and conducts manoeuvres.

Vaidyanathan said the new interiors for the crew would be a standard in the warships that are being built now. Among them are two more frigates of the Shivalik class (the INS Satpura and the INS Sahyadri) and the larger destroyers of the INS Kolkata class (three).
...
...
The Shivalik, whose keel was laid in 2002, is estimated to have cost Rs 2,300 crore. The entire project of three frigates could cost more than Rs 8,000 crore. The second vessel is scheduled for commissioning in November this year and the third in mid-2011.

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 22 Apr 2010 05:25

India Navy to get 16 stealth frigates in 10 years
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 840759.cms

So iam trying to ascertain how they came up with no 16

3 - (project 17) shivalik class
3 - (modified krivak III) Talwar class
7* - project 17A
_________________
13 - TOTAL

So where are the getting the number 16 from.

*- Probable

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Apr 2010 05:27

3 Ruski frigates on order

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 22 Apr 2010 05:51

Carl_T wrote:3 Ruski frigates on order

hmm i mustve missed it...is it confirmed

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Apr 2010 08:34

Are there three further orders of Talwar class besides the three under construction in Russia now?
The IN will have 6 talwar class in the inventory in a few years.
Or is DDM calling the P-28s Frigates?

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 Apr 2010 08:44

Short supply of fleet haunts Navy

The emergency committee of the Union Cabinet had accepted a force level of 138 ships for navy in 1964. The current strength level is 129 ships including vintage submarines, which in any case are being phased out. The navy currently has 37 major war vessels (carrier, destroyers, frigates), 16 submarines, 59 minor war vessels and 17 auxiliary ships. Another minor vessel – an anti-submarine warfare corvette – was launched in the water from Kolkata on Monday. The vessel will be inducted after sea trials.

The submarine fleet is the worst lot among all warships. It is not only down in numbers but the serviceability of these is down to half. Navy officials admit that induction of submarines has not kept pace with the de-induction schedule.

Senior officers have told a Parliamentary panel that the Centre approved a 30 year long term submarine plan in 1999, which entails construction of 24 modern conventional diesel-electric submarines by 2030. Following the 1999 plan, the navy signed a Rs 15000 crore ($ 3 billion) deal in 2005 with French company DCNS to build six submarines at Mazgaon dock in Mumbai. The first submarine was to delivered by 2012.

This programme is lagging behind schedule due to protracted delay in supply. The delivery is now expected to commence in 2015 and the entire fleet should be available by 2018, a navy official told the committee. The Navy, meanwhile, is looking for a shipyard to start building the second line of six conventional submarines with foreign collaboration. The remaining 12 are likely to be completely indigenous.
{ 12 indegenous SSKs or SSNs?}
The much awaited naval satellite is set to be launched between December 2010 and March 2011. The Rs 950 crore satellite, being developed by ISRO, will not only enhance connectivity between various ships and shore-based command units, but also improve navy’s surveillance capability.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Apr 2010 08:47

Gagan wrote:Are there three further orders of Talwar class besides the three under construction in Russia now?
The IN will have 6 talwar class in the inventory in a few years.
Or is DDM calling the P-28s Frigates?

There were news of follow on 3 Teg class under nego with Russia from Russian SY source

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Apr 2010 11:40

Srivastav wrote:
Carl_T wrote:3 Ruski frigates on order
hmm i mustve missed it...is it confirmed

NEW DELHI: The Indian Navy is to get 16 stealth frigates in the next 10 years, with 10 being built indigenously, three imported from Russia and another three on order, an officer said on Wednesday.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 840759.cms

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Apr 2010 11:47

nukavarapu wrote:The infamous Comodore's compromising position pics are out on livefist

Shit man...that is pathetic. They should at least respect that man privacy. He is not some rock star or celebrity....as it is, his career has gone down the drain and personal life would have been one big mess. These snaps will only compound his personal and family woes. The last thing that his wife, children and relatives need to see our his photographs in this state.

aak-thoo

By posting those snaps on his blog, Shiv has proved that he is nothing but a two bit reporter in true Indian print and electronic media genre.....

I think we need to remove the link to the site from BRF. True, people can go to the site and see the snaps. But let us not direct traffic from BRF.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Apr 2010 11:51

I dont understand this ASM fetish BR-demand to equip everything bigger than a tug with klubs.

dont see any discussion on torpedoes, counter measures, machinery quieting, sonars, anti missile tools which represent far bigger threats to IN.

we are like debating whether 16" naval guns are better than 15" when the biggest threat is carrier aviation in WW2.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 22 Apr 2010 11:53

nukavarapu wrote:The infamous Comodore's compromising position pics are out on livefist

damn... those are private pictures (cell ph zindabad), none taken by an intelligence dude. someone must have got hold of his/her cellphone and rest is history.

he is sooo screwed now.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Apr 2010 12:04

yup looks like those pics are taken by probably his own cell phone and by none other than him and may be it must have got leaked by some one close.

Does not look like intel scoop , I agree these pics should not be made public by livefist saves huge embarrassment to his family

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Apr 2010 12:05

these assignments are prestigious ones I expect and fit for command track officers. they are not meant as R&R outings for bar hopping and skirt chasing.

this should be a deterrent for others in pipeline.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 22 Apr 2010 12:07

This is a private matter and shouldn't be disclosed. It is ok for a tabloid blog but not for a defence site.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 22 Apr 2010 12:09

>>>The infamous Comodore's compromising position pics are out on livefist

Though I am not an expert at identifying morphed pictures, these photos appear to be morphed ones. I mean two separate photos the man and woman were cut and pasted to make it appear that they are together.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Apr 2010 12:11

Austin wrote:yup looks like those pics are taken by probably his own cell phone and by none other than him and may be it must have got leaked by some one close.

Like I said before.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Apr 2010 12:15

From the position of the eyes of both the lovebirds,both looking into the camera's lens,and their lovey-dovey expressions,it is clear that they had deep affection for each other.it is most likely that the pics were taken by themselves as mementos and were found out,or that the cavalier commodore's moll has had her pics used for the "frameup"! ...and yes,these are very private pics and the good commodore deserves his privacy.

The Klubs or even Urans if installed on the P-28 need not be in a VLS arrangement,but in inclined launchers amidships as is being done in many western warships.The high "screens" on either beam help conceal the launchers and reduce radar signature.This also helps save space below decks in such an arrangement.There is enough space amidships for such a possibility ,it might need a little lengthening of the hull by a few metres.In fact even B,Mos can be carried by the corvette which is actually the size of a light frigate.The same design if built in bulk,could have different weaponry depending upon the key additional operational duties other thn the main task,ASuW warfare.AS to why Klubs? The missile could be either the anti-sub versions or the anti-ship versions,or land attack even depending upon the situ and requirements of the time.Kulb gives the IN great versatility as a single platform could use any of the three versions.B'Mos does the same too,but is much larger and preferably used on larger ships and subs.

I do agree though that the Talwars might be better vessels than the Kamortas,it depends upon what the price is for each type (I estimate that the Talwars will be at least 25% costlier),though we do need a dedicated ASW platform like the P-28 Kamorta's as there is going to be a proliferation of subs in the coming decade in the IOR.We have to outsource some of our orders to foreign yards and the Talwars have been a v.successful design.

The US's plan to gift Pak "8",yes 8 O.H. Perry class ASW frigates on a "hot condition",which are to be upgraded most probably as Oz has done turning them into very versatile ships,is a direct slap in India's face.Are these frigates,that too 8 of them plus the 8 P-3 Orion LRMP aircraft,to be used to fight the Taliban Navy? What a joke!
It is abundantly clear that "Duplicitous Basta**s",the US,plan the PN to be their proxy in the Arabian Sea/IOR to keep the IN occupied and harried,assisting Paki terror as a consequence (as was perpetrated on 26/11 with the logistic and training help given to the attacking team by the Paki navy).Thus concerned and pre-occupied with countering Paki perfidy,the IN will have scant resources to prevent the US from defecating in the region,invading as it pleases as it has done and doing right now,with Iran as the next inevitable target.

The GOI should retailate and immediately drop the two US candidates for the MMRCA contest to show the duplicitous Yanquis that they must choose their friends in the region wisely.They cannot hunt with the hounds and hide with the hares.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Apr 2010 12:16

Shame on Shiv Aroor for posting these. He has clearly trangressed the man's and that woman's privacy.

Shame on you Shiv Aroor - surely there are some lines that one does not cross?

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 22 Apr 2010 12:19

In total agreement.

Mr. Aroor should have thought about the consequences of such indiscrete behaviour in publishing these things online.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Apr 2010 13:36

very poor form from aroor, sensationalist journalism at its worst. nukavarapu, the officer has already been made an example of, but dragging him in mud in this fashion is just not civilized.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Apr 2010 13:36

I agree too. and perhaps thats the idea why those pix were leaked by the govt.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Apr 2010 13:46

nukavarapu,
I disagree.
The navy or the country does not own a citizen or an officer. An employee has to have full control over his private life and his activities as long as he is not indulging in something that is illegal.

By paying a gold coin to an officer, the country or the Navy does not own that individuals private and personal time and the choices he makes in his private time and his private life are his own. The man is a soldier, but we are not at war.

To make this into a larger issue of representing the country is unfair to that individual.

I recently recall that there was a muslim girl modeling in Israel where the muslim community were protesting at her modeling. Everyone agreed that she represents only herself when she models.

Likewise I would argue, that how the officer chooses to spend his personal time is his own affair. I think the officer might have valid legal grounds to go after the government or the navy should his career be jeopardized over this episode - provided he is cleared of any illegal activities. Moreover, GoI should investigate how these pictures reached the media, and weather someone sold these to the media.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Apr 2010 14:00

Lets continue this in the Nukkad thread: Nukkad-56

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 Apr 2010 14:07

Somehow, agree with nukavarapu's comments and reasoning.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 22 Apr 2010 18:42

INS Shivalik: Strength of Indian Navy

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 22 Apr 2010 19:45

Srivastav wrote:India Navy to get 16 stealth frigates in 10 years
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 840759.cms

So iam trying to ascertain how they came up with no 16

3 - (project 17) shivalik class
3 - (modified krivak III) Talwar class
7* - project 17A
_________________
13 - TOTAL

So where are the getting the number 16 from.

*- Probable

I think the best way of getting more vessels, quickly and economically is to simply order another 3 (6?) P 17A and another 3 (6?) P 15A form MDL and another 3 (6?) Krivaks form Russia.

K

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 22 Apr 2010 20:19

Kersi D wrote:
Srivastav wrote:India Navy to get 16 stealth frigates in 10 years
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 840759.cms

So iam trying to ascertain how they came up with no 16

3 - (project 17) shivalik class
3 - (modified krivak III) Talwar class
7* - project 17A
_________________
13 - TOTAL

So where are the getting the number 16 from.

*- Probable

I think the best way of getting more vessels, quickly and economically is to simply order another 3 (6?) P 17A and another 3 (6?) P 15A form MDL and another 3 (6?) Krivaks form Russia.

K

you people are forgetting the 3 khrivacks already commissioned that makes it 3 khrivaks, 3 improved khrivacks, 3 project 17 shivalik & 7 improved project 17a

The Indian Navy is to get 16 stealth frigates in the next 10 years, with 10 being built indigenously, three already imported from Russia and
another three on order,

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 22 Apr 2010 21:15

The day I saw the 3,100 tonne figure for a corvette, I realized just how serious the navy was.

while at the moment these ships seem single role and somewhat lightly armed ( not for the ASW role however), that can be changed pretty quickly.

The IN will I guess get the following by 2020,

Already building
-----------

1. 3 shivaliks
2. 3 krivak follow ons
3. 4 kamorta class
4. 3 kolkata class
---------------------
13 kick ass ships/KAS ( note I am deliberately not using the term Principal Surface Combatant here , so as to not cause any unnecessary heart burn over the status of the P-28

)

Planned
-------------
1. 7 P-17A
2. 4 P-15 Bs
3. 8 P-28A
4. 3 more Krivaks ( possibly , )
-------------------------------
22 more KAS. ( I am assuming these ships will be delivered by 2020, because modernization of the big PSU yards is nearing completion and private players are kicking in.)

So 35 KASs will be inducted by 2020 in addition to 3 delhi class, 3 brahmaputra and 3 Krivaks

So the IN will have 44 KAS around by 2020 in addition to some upgraded R-class and Godavari class hanging around. ( the move to upgrade them was echoed in that navy day release document).

We'll also have some Ulsan's around with BMs, the 8 missile corvettes and the 12 missile boats.

All this means the IN will have serious surface capability.

Plus 3 carriers, 3-4 SSNs , 14-16 SSks.

Dedicated satellites, network capability backed by LRMPs and possibly strategic bombers.

Not bad at all.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Apr 2010 21:24

I am not too sure about getting all by 2020. could stretch to 2025.

one trend thats going to happen is CG getting increasing and beefier ships that can
do inshore patrolling and submarine chasing , incl perhaps a Sukanya2 class armed
with lighter version of P28 fitment while IN retires the missile corvettes and smallest ship would be P28.

the only thing missing from IN's plan seems a couple of helicopter carriers for the
ASW cum marine commando role.

and we do need atleast 15 plastic hulled mine hunting ships. unsexy but good to
have.

3-4 more fast tankers, 3-4 more auxiliary stores ships, 2 more submarine tenders , 1 medium naval base in A&N as a fwd base for offensive ops and recovery.

a group of 8 land based EMB145-AWACS owned by IN.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 22 Apr 2010 22:17

oh yeah didn't put in the LHD requirement deliberately. ( apparently people are now thinking in terms of LHDs instead of LPDs.)

the 3 LHD figure has been thrown around a bit and the IN will probably want to acquire serious over the horizon assault capability by 2020.

By the way lets not forget the six 'sexy' catamaran hydrographic ships either.

If found satisfactory I would suggest that the IN could look at building some missile armed FACs based on them.

Oh and throw in some airborne refuellers as well. may be the old bears can be converted to that role later.

Avik · Post by **Avik** » 23 Apr 2010 01:43

Guys,

I have a question on the induction and production schedule of capital warships of the IN over the next few years.
It appears that all the Shivaliks will be inducted by 2011; the three modified follow on Krivaks will also have come by 2012; all the three Kolkata classes will be commissioned by 2013.
Now, given that the keel is yet to be launched for either the new Project 17 As and/or Project 15 Bs, the most optimistic dates for their commission (assuming these ships start building in 2010-11) will be atleast 2017.

So, essentially, there is a minimum 4 year gap (2013-17) when the IN will not be commissioning any capital warship (other than the aircraft carriers).

The above scenario is coupled with a situation when the Rajput class will be decommissioned, and probably so will the Godavaris (progressively).
Hence, by around 2015-16, the INs principal surface combatants would consist of 3 Delhi Class + 3 Kolkata Class + 6 Mod Krivaks + 3 Shivaliks + 3 Brahmaputra class ships = 18 warships.

Now, further, I would assume that by 2015-16, IN would allocate about 6 warships to each of the aircraft carrier groups. IN would also probably need to maintain warships on stations in the Northern and Western Arabian Sea (3) + Bay of Bengal (3) + Andamans (3) + Southern Arabian Sea/ Indian Ocean (3).

Assuming a 75% availability of ships for deployment (post maintenance, dry docking etc.), the minimum requirement in 2015-16 would be about 32 ships (translating into 24 ships available for deployment).

Now, as I have tried to reason, there appears to be a significant shortfall from the desired number of 32 to the available number , 18 ships , circa 2015-16.

So, how does the IN make up for the gaps? Is it ordering additional ships to plug the gaps between 2013-17 when no new ship (other than the carriers) will be inducted? And how is the IN planning its fleet configuration in the 2016-17 zone when 12 of the available 18 ships (principal surface combatants) will be deployed as aircraft carrier escorts ?

Thanks,

Avik

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Apr 2010 02:47

X-posting from MRCA thread!

Henrik wrote:A US aircraft carrier won't come without lots of attached strings..

hmmm ... that's a very generic statement to make ... could you be more specific about the strings that you can see.

We might have had to buy 40 F-18s, but then there is no reason why a Mig-29 won't fly off the deck of such a large aircraft carrier. But even if we would have had to buy those aircraft, I don't see such a big issue. Afterall F-18 is one of the most, if not the most proven modern fighter out at sea! If we want to operate an aircraft carrier, we have to buy airplanes!!!

SO moving on I am trying to understand GOIs decision on missing out on a "free" AC of that size (please dont jump on me for calling it free. I understand that it won't be completely free). Imagine the force projection of such a carrier! Besides the induction of Kitty Hawk would have been way faster, as it was an operational ship when it was being offered! And we would have had a platform for our Hawkeyes (if we really get them)!

Questions in my mind:
1. Would its refitting/refurbishing be prohibitively expensive? I dont believe it would be as expensive as Vikramaditya which has been docked for 15 years now and underwent major structural changes!
2. Would it have been very difficult to fit out our weapons on that carrier?
3. I feel one of the main reasons might be that we are not in position to build a CBG for a aircraft carrier of this size fast enough (as we already are trying to gear up for 2-3 others)? Lack of ship-building resources-certainly! Lack of money?!!!

Oh and by the way, USS Kitty Hawk was famous as the last USN aircraft carrier which had conventional propulsion (unlike what's printed in the article). So I don't see a quantum jump in knowledge required to operate the ship!

Would love to know the answers and if there could be more reasons.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Apr 2010 02:56

Avik wrote:Guys,

I have a question on the induction and production schedule of capital warships of the IN over the next few years.
It appears that all the Shivaliks will be inducted by 2011; the three modified follow on Krivaks will also have come by 2012; all the three Kolkata classes will be commissioned by 2013.
Now, given that the keel is yet to be launched for either the new Project 17 As and/or Project 15 Bs, the most optimistic dates for their commission (assuming these ships start building in 2010-11) will be atleast 2017.

So, essentially, there is a minimum 4 year gap (2013-17) when the IN will not be commissioning any capital warship (other than the aircraft carriers).

The above scenario is coupled with a situation when the Rajput class will be decommissioned, and probably so will the Godavaris (progressively).
Hence, by around 2015-16, the INs principal surface combatants would consist of 3 Delhi Class + 3 Kolkata Class + 6 Mod Krivaks + 3 Shivaliks + 3 Brahmaputra class ships = 18 warships.

Now, further, I would assume that by 2015-16, IN would allocate about 6 warships to each of the aircraft carrier groups. IN would also probably need to maintain warships on stations in the Northern and Western Arabian Sea (3) + Bay of Bengal (3) + Andamans (3) + Southern Arabian Sea/ Indian Ocean (3).

Assuming a 75% availability of ships for deployment (post maintenance, dry docking etc.), the minimum requirement in 2015-16 would be about 32 ships (translating into 24 ships available for deployment).

Now, as I have tried to reason, there appears to be a significant shortfall from the desired number of 32 to the available number , 18 ships , circa 2015-16.

So, how does the IN make up for the gaps? Is it ordering additional ships to plug the gaps between 2013-17 when no new ship (other than the carriers) will be inducted? And how is the IN planning its fleet configuration in the 2016-17 zone when 12 of the available 18 ships (principal surface combatants) will be deployed as aircraft carrier escorts ?

Thanks,

Avik

Awesome question! I think they will push back the decommissioning of at least a few of them, as has been the norm!

Now, waiting for a better answer