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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vavinash » 26 Jul 2009 14:16

Thanks SNaik. The first hull is to be delivered in 2011 to IN isn't it? Can you shed some light on the medium SAM for this batch. Is it still single arm shtil-1?

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 522
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 26 Jul 2009 14:32

vavinash wrote:Thanks SNaik. The first hull is to be delivered in 2011 to IN isn't it? Can you shed some light on the medium SAM for this batch. Is it still single arm shtil-1?

Yes, 2011 is correct. Regarding the SAM - will have to wait till the hull is launched to get a better view on the bow from above. The purchase of weapons and electronics for the ship is not finished, until now the list doesn't include SAM systems.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 26 Jul 2009 14:52

SNaik , I believe the second batch will have VLS Shtil-1 , we did see the VLS variant of it on the other forum

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2384
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 26 Jul 2009 18:15

Austin, I would suspect VL-shtil but i do not think it has been confirmed yet. Will have to wait and see.

but did IN ever conducted trials of TOR short range missiles?

by the way both tor and aster15 are used for the same purpose barak-1 used and both missiles are faster than barak-1

barak-1 has been tested on P-20M (SS-N-2D) missiles not on current antiship missiles which are smaller

and yes there is still need of guns despite point defence missiles

example phalanx CIWS is installed on arleigh burke class vessels despite these ships have ESSM,SM-2

and SHTIL is a anti aircraft missile rather than point defence missile so SHTIL can't be used to defend the ship against sea skimming missile but tor,aster15,barak-1 can do this.if there point defence missiles fail then SA-N-11 and 30mm guns comes to action.

Barak is slower because it was designed primarily to intercept missiles and to minimize its minimum range. Aster, shtil etc have minimum engagement range of around 3 km compared to less 500 meters. Barak-1 has been tested against sea skimmer like harpoon it was designed mainly to counter them (Exocet deployed by Iraq). There are pictures of it even intercepting a drone about the size of harpoon couple hundred feet from platform during RSN testing.

Phalanx on burke were installed due to USS cole incident there were orginally to phased out.

sid_ashar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 08:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sid_ashar » 26 Jul 2009 21:33

I am sure this has been brought up before but could not find any reference to it on this thread but now that the nuclear power plant for Arihant is almost ready to go, is there a reason why the next generation of our IACs would not be nuke propelled? I would imagine that in addition to the greenhouse gas emission reduction (make the Obama's of the world happy I guess), it would give us tremendous operational flexibility with the fleet being out at sea for months without any risk of detection.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17001
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 26 Jul 2009 22:28

sid, our experience with nuclear propulsion has just started, our experience with building carriers is also not all that much.

no wonder they will wait for both capability to mature before going for a nuclear powered carrier.
also it will make more sense for a larger vessel than the 40000 t species.
may be after the IAC-2 is laid ? we do hear of a larger design now and then as a follow up to the Project 71.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 26 Jul 2009 22:47

John , some pictures of VLS Shtil-1

link
link

I am hoping the VLS Shtil will make it on the 2nd batch of talwar , it looks quite modular

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3096
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vera_k » 26 Jul 2009 22:56

There's been an informal report that the shipyards are planning to build 5 aircraft carriers, the last 2 with nuclear propulsion.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/02/co ... craft.html

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 26 Jul 2009 23:07

Let them build one first get it right , on time and budget

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Willy » 26 Jul 2009 23:48

The No-5 for aircraft carriers that the IN plans to have keeps on popping up. With the Chinese planning on around 6 carriers hope that the number five holds true in a reasonable amount of time.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Vipul » 27 Jul 2009 02:03

Seven new stealth frigates to be built in India.

India’s largest warship builders — Mazagon Dock Ltd (MDL), Mumbai; and Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers (GRSE), Kolkata — have prevailed over the Indian Navy’s objections. Business Standard has learned that MDL and GRSE will divide between them the entire order for seven improved stealth frigates, code-named Project 17A.

The navy was insisting that the first two frigates of Project 17A be built abroad, so that MDL and GRSE could learn how to build ships using new modular methods that are preferred by European shipyards. This would have raised the price of Project 17A by more than Rs 5,000 crore.

MDL and GRSE countered that they possessed the technology and the experience for building cutting-edge warships entirely in India.

Each Shivalik class frigate of Project 17 was priced at Rs 2,600 crore, and the navy plans to insist on the same price for Project 17A. Building abroad would cost at least twice as much as building at MDL and GRSE.

But the navy was focusing on early delivery, rather than cost. Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, insisted on presenting before the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the highest decision-making body in the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the advantages of kicking off Project 17A in a foreign shipyard. But Defence Minister AK Antony stepped in to order entirely indigenous production.

At GRSE, a modernisation programme is underway to create the facilities needed for building Project 17A. The Chairman and Managing Director (CMD), Rear Admiral KC Sekhar, said a fully equipped modular yard with a 250-ton Goliath crane will be ready in mid-2011. By then, MoD sanctions will be in place and the navy would have completed the design of Project 17B.

Explaining the time-line, Admiral Sekhar said, “The MoD has informally told us that MDL and GRSE will build Project 17A; we are awaiting [formal sanction]. Once the navy finalises the size and design of the new frigate, we will decide our build strategy and costing. Then, hopefully, by the end of 2009, the MoD will issue a Request for Proposals (RfP); GRSE and MDL will submit separate quotes; and then the MoD will place a formal order on the shipyards. Construction should start by end-2011.”

This is the first time that India’s two major defence shipyards are sharing one project between them. And while MDL and GRSE are bidding separately, they are working in close consultation.

Admiral Sekhar points out that both shipyards have a common aim: to construct this largest-ever order of seven frigates without any delays. He explains, “We will have a common design for all seven ships of Project 17A. MDL can be the lead shipyard, since they have more experience in building bigger ships. They can start work on the first frigate; after six months, we will start work on the second one.”

While MDL takes the lead in construction, GRSE will lead the design effort. A month ago, three companies — GRSE; French shipbuilder, DCNS; and Kolkata-based IT engineering company, Vision Comptech — formed a joint venture (JV) to design marine products, including warships, for customers globally. This JV is expected to work with the navy’s Directorate General of Naval Design (DGND) on the design for Project 17A.

If all goes well, say the shipyards, the first Project 17A frigates should be delivered to the Indian Navy by 2016-17.

sid_ashar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 08:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sid_ashar » 27 Jul 2009 03:05

vera_k, thanks for the link. I figured the discussion would have come up on some blog before.

While I agree that the naval designers have to learn to walk before they can run, the main question is why would they not consider a nuclear propulsion system from IAC2 onwards. Also, if the AC is pretty big to begin with (like 35,000 tons and higher), can the propulsion system be changed from conventional GT driven (like I believe the IACs are expected to be) to a nuclear reactor driven. While there are technical issues here in changing, if they are configured into the design from the beginning, they dont seem to be insurmountable.

Its probably mainly a cost trade-off I think since even france is planning on using conventional power for their new AC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_navy

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby shiv » 27 Jul 2009 06:59

sid_ashar wrote:is there a reason why the next generation of our IACs would not be nuke propelled?


Availability of unsafeguarded HEU?

Andrew DeCristofaro
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 14 Jun 2009 22:37

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Andrew DeCristofaro » 27 Jul 2009 08:05

sid_ashar wrote:is there a reason why the next generation of our IACs would not be nuke propelled?

aren't nuke powered aircraft carriers wastage of money?

lets first build first conventionally powered AC.

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Venkarl » 27 Jul 2009 08:29

not only money...even BRF bandwidth too


K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 27 Jul 2009 09:25

Given the track record of our shipyards the decision to built all of them in India is a bad one. It will cause quite a lot of delay in acquisition.
BTW any news on INS Shivalik?

nash
BRFite
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nash » 27 Jul 2009 10:00

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/07/ ... ealth.html
in the ajai shukla blog he mention about project 17B...

is india going for next series of frigate after 17A...or it a printing mistake

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17001
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 27 Jul 2009 10:02

typo, note the date. end 2011 is when the 17A construction at MDL is supposed to begin.
Last edited by Rahul M on 27 Jul 2009 10:19, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: edited wrong info.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nash » 27 Jul 2009 10:28

Rahul M wrote:typo, note the date. end 2011 is when the 17A construction at MDL is supposed to begin.


yeah that what i also thinking...

so its printing mistake.. right..

for one sec. i got excited ... :)

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 27 Jul 2009 10:32

Vipul wrote:Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, insisted on presenting before the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the highest decision-making body in the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the advantages of kicking off Project 17A in a foreign shipyard. But Defence Minister AK Antony stepped in to order entirely indigenous production.
Damn! How do we lamblast the UPA on this one? :evil:

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17001
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 27 Jul 2009 10:40

^^
don't, at least not here.
anyway, it's a calculated risk they have taken. whether it's justified or not is arguable but it is certainly not an out and out bad decision.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 27 Jul 2009 11:21

Russian Navy ends first stage of Nerpa sub trials in Far East

The vessel resumed sea trials on July 10 in the Sea of Japan following extensive repairs.

"The first set of sea trials has been successfully completed according to schedule," a shipyard official told RIA Novosti.

"The sub is back at the in Bolshoy Kamen in the Primorye Territory, and it is getting ready for the second stage of the scheduled testing," the official said, adding that some equipment for performance checking and adjustment work will be installed on board the submarine.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Gerard » 28 Jul 2009 02:25

'Indian naval orders help Russia maintain lead in warships'
"The Indian naval orders, including Talwar class frigates, have allowed Russia to maintain its lead in many areas of warship-building," Dr Konstantin Makiyenko of a Moscow-based independent defence think-tank said.

Speaking on the state-run Vesti FM radio on the occasion of Russian Navy Day, Makiyenko, deputy director of Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, noted that due to Indian orders Russia could complete its ship-based URAN missile systems and other force multipliers.
Makiyenko also lauded the Indian Navy personnel saying that Russia should take a cue from them how to maintain and operate their warships.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Gerard » 28 Jul 2009 02:37

The navy surfaces
India’s submarine fleet today is smaller than it was 15 or 20 years ago, in large part because the programme to build HDW submarines at Mazagon Docks was scrapped in the wake of a bribery scandal that surfaced in the early 1980s; this was the first of several episodes in the last quarter century when a pay-off scandal derailed an armaments acquisition programme.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kailash » 28 Jul 2009 15:04

Sorry for taking this OT.But I hate to see the current state of our armed forces.

Why should a company/country be blacklisted for the bribery done by few key persons?
Shouldn't we just throw out the "individuals" involved in the fraud (both sides)and continue commerce with the company? or why don't we do concurrent CBI checks AS the deals are being negotiated?

Even an acquisition or takeover doesn't change the image of a company (e.g. Bofors), then I don't know exactly who/what we are blacklisting or punishing. Guess a company name change would appeal better to MoD/GoI

Ajay K
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 04 Aug 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ajay K » 28 Jul 2009 16:54

Kailash
Why should a company/country be blacklisted for the bribery done by few key persons?
.....................................................................................................................

Very true that only middle men/companies involved should be blacklisted not the arm producing company. Name change of arm producer will have the same effect as Satyam now being called Mah. Satyam. :wink:

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Willy » 28 Jul 2009 21:40

When will private shipyards like the Adani's and L&T get orders to build larger warships like frigates and destroyers? Depending on MDL and Garden reach is like having to wait for a man to reach mars.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17001
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 28 Jul 2009 21:57

when they develop the capability to build larger warships they will get the orders.
such ability doesn't develop in a day.

their orderbooks will start with smaller ships in order to develop competence gradually.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby KrishG » 28 Jul 2009 22:06

Willy wrote:When will private shipyards like the Adani's and L&T get orders to build larger warships like frigates and destroyers? Depending on MDL and Garden reach is like having to wait for a man to reach mars.


L&T could build the Luda class submarines in their new dockyard under construction if Russia will the P-75 contract.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Katare » 29 Jul 2009 01:02


Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 952
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Guddu » 29 Jul 2009 01:50

NRao wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:why CAG doesn't comment on ATV project ongoing for last several decades.

if CAG does it then this would bring many things for public to know about ATV and something which MoD or Navy will never tell to public. :idea:


Buddy, ATV is a StratAsset. You can complain about your wife .................. strat asset/s - no. Never.


er..what about wife's strat assets :mrgreen:

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2384
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 29 Jul 2009 03:13

Hopefully we continue procuring Talwar while whenever P-17/P-17As are commissioned, i am bit skeptical on the timelines P-17A i will be happy if MDL/GRSE build one before 2018. Also cost argument for all 7 P-17As being built locally doesn't make much sense, P-17s cost around 500+ million which is more than Talwar and comparable vessels build by other navies cost about the same.

JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby JaiS » 30 Jul 2009 05:26

Seems like Gorshkov final price is undecided yet.

No decision yet on Gorshkov: Antony

Coastal security exercise kicks off

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 30 Jul 2009 07:01


narayana
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 12:01

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby narayana » 30 Jul 2009 10:15

Groshkov

"The anti-aircraft missile complex selected to be fitted in the ship failed during the trials and the refurbishment contract was concluded without the missile system...This implies that the ship would not have a CIWS (Close-In Weapon System) till her first refit in India in 2017," the report pointed out.

The CIWS is a vital shipboard weapon for detecting and destroying incoming anti-ship missiles and enemy aircraft at short range.


What is this?Groshkov was supposed to be fitted with barak and kashtan CIWS,and kashtan is already proven system,which system is he talking abt?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20704
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 30 Jul 2009 11:48

There is something wrong with the CAG's assessment.Yes,both the Russians and we goofed up on the estimation of work and its price and are both paying for it.However,it is inconceivable that the Gorshkov will be delivered without any CIWS,when every Russian warship bought by India has both 30mm gatlings,plus Igla series Manpads and a SAM system like Shtil.The Talwars have the Kashtan.All diagrams,pics of the Gorshkov have shown that there are provisions for such CIWS systems aboard and perhaps even Barak might be later incorporated.The costing for a new carrier has also been grossly underestimated.If the deal is scrapped,it will be a massive blow not just to the IN,but the country's maritime security,as the new carrier being built at Cohin will not appear until 2015 at least.The Gorshkov is essential for our maritime security until 2020,when we will then have two home built carriers to replace in service too.The goal is eventually for three carriers to be built.

PS:CNS backs the deal.
Naval chief backs Gorshkov deal
Headlines Today
New Delhi, July 30, 2009

India's hugely contentious acquisition of the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier has been a stain on protocol and basic government prudence. But the chief of naval staff has thrown his weight behind the highly criticised deal.

A day after Defence Minister A.K. Antony told Parliament that the overpriced contract was still not complete, Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta indicated that the establishment had spent too much time and effort on the deal for any thought of pulling out at this stage.

He also indicated that the Gorshkov would very much be a part of the navy's dream of operating three aircraft carriers by 2020.

Interestingly, despite the major audit indictment on the deal, the navy chief did not think the price arrived at was too high.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/index.php? ... ssueid=116

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby abhiti » 30 Jul 2009 16:55

Philip wrote:There is something wrong with the CAG's assessment.Yes,both the Russians and we goofed up on the estimation of work and its price and are both paying for it.


Philip, the Russian agent. :rotfl:

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby krishnan » 30 Jul 2009 17:30

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?a=jh ... l_Gorshkov

New Delhi: Under attack from CAG for the escalating cost of second-hand aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov bought from Russia, Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta today defended the price being paid by India for the warship.

"I can't comment on the CAG. But you all are defence analysts, can you get me an aircraft carrier for less than USD two billion? If you can, I am going to sign a cheque right now," Mehta told reporters on the sidelines of the 'Naval Self Reliance Seminar' organised by CII.

When asked about CAG's finding that the Navy had not done its risk analysis before going in for the ship, he said, "I can ensure you that there is no such thing. There is no question, we have been looking at the ship since late 90's.

"From the time I know that we have been talking and finally in 2004, when the deal was done after two-three years of negotiations, it was done in extreme seriousness and there is no question of any laxity."


Asked if the Navy was satisfied with the services and support provided by Russian Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), Mehta said that they have to reach the OEMs through agencies and the agency sometimes might not give the job to best suited manufacturer or yard.

"So, we have a little issue with that. But we have lived with it for many years and the ships have done quite well," he said.

On increasing the range of K-15 missiles to be equipped on the nuclear submarine INS Arihant, Mehta said,"All this will happen in a due course of time."

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 30 Jul 2009 17:43

CNS Mehta seems to have toned down , after last year outburst on Russia on Groshkov price rise issue , now he says not less than $2 Billion.

So the ATV launch has done a lot good to his soul :lol:


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests