Indian Naval Discussion

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 31 Jul 2009 02:33

'More upgrades will hike the Gorshkov's price'
A consummate Russian diplomat, Vyacheslav Trubnikov is returning home this week after having served as serving as Russia’s ambassador to India for nearly five years. The period has seen several highs and lows in the bilateral relationship, including the building of the first civil nuclear power plants by Russia and nagging problems over defence spares and equipment. Edited excerpts from an interview with Jyoti Malhotra

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... 5C/365376/

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 31 Jul 2009 04:37

My guess is that the IN is going to get some state of the art stuff on the Gorky. CIWS failure? Ridiculous. Perhaps they were trying to incorporate the Barak? Still that shouldn't be so difficult considering the amount of israeli gear the IN has stuffed on russki platforms.

As far as the price on the Gorky goes, who knows whats being paid for? Open sources speculate on a variety of hardware. Anything from AESA/TVC on the fulcrums to Akulas, and so on. We'll see.

CM.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 31 Jul 2009 05:13

abhiti, kindly desist from name-calling in the future and argue with valid point of your own.

Navy officials gather for Boeing P-8A Poseidon rollout

Boeing this morning will roll out its P-8A Poseidon, a modified 737 designed for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

Boeing is building five test aircraft as part of a $3.89 billion Navy contract. The P-8A is designed to help the Navy survey enemy submarines and other shallow-water craft.

The Boeing-led team developing the P-8A includes CFM International (engines), Northrop Grumman (data link and infra-red), Raytheon (radar and intelligence), GE Aviation (flight management system) and Spirit AeroSystems (fuselage, tail and struts).

The first production contracted is expected in 2010. Boeing says that the Navy plans to buy 117 P-8As to replace its fleet of P-3C aircraft. Operational capability is scheduled for 2013. The government of India has also ordered eight P-8Is, a derivative of the American version.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 31 Jul 2009 05:26

Scorpene Submarine Among Many Lima '09 Highlights

Visitors could for the first time witness a flypass by the elite B-52 bombers from the United States and an aerobatic show by Surya Kiran and Sarang of India.

Others lineup include the RSS Intrepid frigate from Singapore, a Pakistan tanker destroyer and warships from India and the United States.

TimeNow is PO'd after it's secret report with secret sources got rebuffed.

'Defect in sea-eagle detected, only a teething problem' ( WTF Timesnow? )

The Navy chief speaking specifically in context of the defective Sea Eagle, a subsonic anti-ship missile which cost close to a 120 crores to the Defence Coffers, brushed aside the expose saying that the problems identified were teething issues and could be managed ( ).

Sitaphal -- the cluster bomb, is not in use since key components have become unavailable and finally the 450 kg high speed low drag bomb too had not been put to use due to the mismatch in components.

In other news, Narangi, Mausambi and HaapusAam were found running short on juices.

amdavadi · Post by **amdavadi** » 31 Jul 2009 05:37

what about tarbuch, kela, chiku?

prataparudra · Post by **prataparudra** » 31 Jul 2009 07:28

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/16de2e94-7d22 ... abdc0.html

100 warships in 10 years.

...Hope we can do this on time..

John · Post by **John** » 31 Jul 2009 08:26

Cain Marko wrote:My guess is that the IN is going to get some state of the art stuff on the Gorky. CIWS failure? Ridiculous. Perhaps they were trying to incorporate the Barak? Still that shouldn't be so difficult considering the amount of israeli gear the IN has stuffed on russki platforms.

As far as the price on the Gorky goes, who knows whats being paid for? Open sources speculate on a variety of hardware. Anything from AESA/TVC on the fulcrums to Akulas, and so on. We'll see.

CM.

The CIWS they are most likely referring to is Kashtan, while back there was an news article that IN was less than impressed with Kashtan. IIRC Russians countered with Kashtan-m don't know what happened with that.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jul 2009 08:43

JaiS wrote: Sitaphal -- the cluster bomb, is not in use since key components have become unavailable and finally the 450 kg high speed low drag bomb too had not been put to use due to the mismatch in components.

In other news, Narangi, Mausambi and HaapusAam were found running short on juices.

All these **** Hindu god names..

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 31 Jul 2009 08:50

I saw it on TV, navy chief didn't deny the news, he said that in other countries people can go to manufacturer directly but we have to go to interstate agencies (read MoD) to get these teething problems rectified.

I think the reported problems are real but in a large stockpile these things are bound to happen with certain items and media could do with little less scandal-mongering. Good thing is that they are regularly checking and maintaining their ammunitions/missiles.

The two local ammunitions that are in trouble (sitaphal and 450lb high speed free fall bombs) are because replacement parts are not available anymore(most probably imported parts like fuse?).

arun · Post by **arun** » 31 Jul 2009 09:18

Katare,

My view is quite similar to yours though based on an article rather than a TV report quoting Admiral Sureesh Mehta.

If the below is the sum and substance of what Admiral Sureesh Mehta had to say, then he certainly has not provided a very robust affirmation that all is essentially well with the Sea Eagle Missile:

"Sea eagle missile is an ancient missile and we don't rely on it. With more indigenous capability coming in, most of these are being brought into our platforms. Whatever we have got in our inventory, they are perfectly fine missiles and with 100 per cent insurance of hits."

Manorama Online

Regards the other weapon systems, no comment is offered.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 31 Jul 2009 10:24

Navy chief defends Gorshkov deal

"I can't comment on the CAG. But you all are defence analysts, can you get me an aircraft carrier for less than $2 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.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 31 Jul 2009 10:27

JaiS wrote:Sitaphal

JaiS wrote:In other news, Narangi, Mausambi and HaapusAam were found running short on juices.

amdavadi wrote:what about tarbuch, kela, chiku?

shiv wrote:All these **** Hindu god names..

The pakis have an unbeatable one: The crate mango.

arun · Post by **arun** » 31 Jul 2009 11:14

Excerpted Gorshkov / Vikramaditya related aspects from interview of outgoing Russian Ambassador to India, Vyacheslav Trubnikov:

'More upgrades will hike the Gorshkov's price'

Jyoti Malhotra / New Delhi July 31, 2009, 0:50 IST

A consummate Russian diplomat, Vyacheslav Trubnikov is returning home this week after having served as serving as Russia’s ambassador to India for nearly five years. The period has seen several highs and lows in the bilateral relationship, including the building of the first civil nuclear power plants by Russia and nagging problems over defence spares and equipment. Edited excerpts from an interview with Jyoti Malhotra. ……………

Then why is there so much bitterness, for example, in the purchase of the aircraft carrier, Admiral Gorshkov; even Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has admitted that…

Yes, I accept there has been some bitterness on both sides. But at the same time both sides want to come to consensus because we understand that the Gorshkov or INS Vikramaditya is absolutely essential for India. We could have taken it back to our own Navy and returned the money to India, but we did not do it. I am absolutely sure that some people in our Navy want it back, but we understand that this is the flagship of India’s eastern fleet. We are responsible enough to understand that India must get this aircraft carrier. India understands this too. The question is tha of price and timing of delivery.

So what happened over the years?

The discussions between the two sides started when ‘Gorshkov’ was only a boat, without any equipment. You have to realise that the final price (of the aircraft-carrier) and the time of its completion, ultimately depend on the character and quality of the order placed by the buyer, which includes the refit, the equipment on board and its necessary upgrades. And usually the appetite changes as you eat.

Are you saying the Indian side kept changing its order?

Not changing, but the Indian Navy was eager to get the best, the most modern equipment.

So the Navy’s appetite kept increasing, they wanted more and more..

Yes.

... But this constant back and forth, officials traveling up and down and the long delays?

The major reason is that the contract was signed when the Russian side, the plant Sevmash, badly needed money and wanted to sign the contract, while the Indian side wanted to buy an absolutely modern aircraft carrier at lower than the cheapest price. After the contract was signed (in 2004), both sides began to understand exactly the enormity of the task they had undertaken to do. But the realisation came a little late.

The Indians complain that the Russians are constantly changing the price.

Yes, we are changing the price, but if the value of the dollar changes, should we stick to the same figure? If the price is in our favour, do you think the Indian side would pay more? I don’t think so. It is a serious commercial discussion.

Reports are that it will cost around $2.2 billion?

It would be irresponsible of me to comment. Price negotiations are now entering the final stage. What is important for India is also the time of delivery. But the point is that if India wants additional equipment, the carrier will cost even more. So if both sides stop and decide, okay no request from India and no increase in price from our side, then we can finalise price and delivery.

Business Standard

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 31 Jul 2009 13:51

On July 26 2009, when the ceremony of INS Arihant induction was going now,many TV channels were displaying a submarine on the coast of Vishakapatanam,that was PNS Ghazi which was sunk on Dec 3 1971,this was turned into a Submarine Museum

Ghazi

wish we did some Reverse Engineering on it at that time.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 Jul 2009 13:55

^^^
if you ever find the reporter who did that story, shoot him !

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 31 Jul 2009 14:04

Rahul M wrote:^^^
if you ever find the reporter who did that story, shoot him !

you didnt hear the worst yet,one Regional channel had a reporter inside the sub and was explaining the parts,like where the crew stays and engine room etc etc,without mentioning that it was not the INS Arihant. DDM getting more smarter and smarter

.

amit · Post by **amit** » 31 Jul 2009 14:16

narayana wrote:
^^^
if you ever find the reporter who did that story, shoot him !

you didnt hear the worst yet,one Regional channel had a reporter inside the sub and was explaining the parts,like where the crew stays and engine room etc etc,without mentioning that it was not the INS Arihant. DDM getting more smarter and smarter .

Actually from what I've heard and read, a lot of intelligence gathering - in fact the majority - are not done in James Bond 007 style. Instead it's done through extensive gathering of various open source information about the subject of interest.

Assuming this to be true, just imagine the frustration of soopar TFTA spies/analysts of Unkil and Uncle Jiang, as they go through the myriad of DDM reporting about the Arihant that's proliferating the media and Internet.

Why on BRF itself we've got the length going from 111 metres all the way to 124 metres and the reactor power output from 80 MW to 180 MW. And the sub being compared with just about every N-sub the Russians ever built!

If BRF can have such divergence just imagine the confusion in DDM world. More power to DDM I say.

And our chai biskut eating babus seemed to have done a pretty good job of fudging the issue - even Jane's talks about the submarine being used as a "technology demonstrator" onlee (Uncles Khan and Jiang would be pleased)! I'm sure the babu who fed that to Jane's that did so with a straight face while sipping his chai and munching his biskut!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 Jul 2009 14:42

narayana wrote:
Rahul M wrote:^^^
if you ever find the reporter who did that story, shoot him !

you didnt hear the worst yet,one Regional channel had a reporter inside the sub and was explaining the parts,like where the crew stays and engine room etc etc,without mentioning that it was not the INS Arihant. DDM getting more smarter and smarter .

I hope you do realise that the submarine museum is our very own INS Kursura and not the PNS Ghazi. only a few parts of ghazi were ever recovered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Kursura_S20

in this case DDM was being even more dense than usual and that's saying something.

wish we did some Reverse Engineering on it at that time.

why would you want to reverse engineer a WW2 ship in 1971 when you had much more modern ships in your own navy ?

kidoman · Post by **kidoman** » 31 Jul 2009 14:51

narayana wrote:On July 26 2009, when the ceremony of INS Arihant induction was going now,many TV channels were displaying a submarine on the coast of Vishakapatanam,that was PNS Ghazi which was sunk on Dec 3 1971,this was turned into a Submarine Museum

Ghazi

wish we did some Reverse Engineering on it at that time.

Heyyy i thought PNS Ghazi still rests somewhere in the waters of BoB.
The submarine the reporters were showing(inc. our Shiv Aroor) was a Foxtrot class decommissioned one.
I heard him mentioning this explicitly also.

Am i correct or not?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Jul 2009 15:00

Russia's Nerpa nuclear sub starts sea trials in Far East

Following the repairs, which cost an estimated 1.9 billion rubles ($60 million), the submarine was cleared for final sea trials before being commissioned with the Russian Navy, and will be leased to the Indian Navy by the end of 2009 under the name INS Chakra.

At $60 million it looks like an some expensive repair work done on the sub , compare that to ~ $80 million we spent to upgrade each Kilo Klub completely.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jul 2009 15:46

"Philip the Russkie agent"! I wish I was part of Kim Phibly's Cambridge ring.I would've retired a long time ago and be resident in Monaco or some other tax haven with a Natasha on my lap,drinking vintage Krug champagne by the gallon and savouring caviar by the kilo! Unfortunately one has to slog like a dog to keep one's stock of scotch from evaporating!

Back to realities.The Russian ambasador made some very interesting points as did our CNS reg. the Gorshkov deal and the whole gamut of Indo-Russian defence cooperation.I smell a rat with the sudden CAG outpourings.Unlike some previous findings,these seem rather biased and anti-Russian.Is there a legendary "hidden hand" in it somewhere ,especially as some big orders are to be finalised and wasn't it more than a "coincidence" that it was released at the same time that the Arihant was launched? I'm serious on this one though.There are going to be more dirty tricks fom the competitors of the MMRCA deal than just the purloining of top secret defence papers allegedly by Lockheed,with the French wanting them banned for doing so!

The more serious expose was that of the so-called "Dud" missiles scandal.The TV channel that featured it had three ex-service chiefs to respond.ACM Krishnaswamy took the stand of age of missiles,upgrades,storage,shel life, as factors that could affect the performance.Adm.Bhagwat spoke of the role of middlemen,poor SRs and deliberate lopholes as far as cost-escalation and performance were concerned,a stand disputed by the ACM.Gen Shankar Roy said that as far as the Army was concerned,the Army specified what it wanted and that their missiles were less sophisticated than the other services.The ACM alsos aid that he never had any pressure from vested interesta nd the service mentioned exactly what it wanted.Reg. the Sea eagle,from the thre chiefs,it was clear that the missile was 30 yrs old,had been upgraded twice before,was no longer in production and that it was/had been replaced.An old story if one.As for Russian eqpt. being at fault,85% of Indian equipment was Russian origin.It was normal for some eqpt. to fail and the conditions under which the missiles were stored was crucial.Most required AC and storage dumps faced power cuts,etc.,so mainnteneance of munitions was a vital factor.It is alsoa well known fact that many spares for Russian eqpt. were acquired from diverse sources after the SU's collapse and many profited.There was no way to guarantee their performance either as they were not acquired from the original manufacturer.

The TV channel responded saying that in the case of Israeli Harpy and other missiles,also "Duds",their basic performance at intitial trials found faults (wing faults,seeker faults,etc) and despite these the missiles were acquired ,that too without any other vendors being approached.These cases have more to answer as the allegations are that they did not peform at trials and were bought nevertheless.The three chiefs also wanted the chronology and details of eqpt. mentioned as to ascertain the cause of faults.

The forthright counter from the CNS puts the Gorky acquisition in proper perspective.If one studies the whole chronology,one can see how tortuous the Indian defence acquisition process is,the poor lack of planning in advance for replacement of capital ships and subs and untimately we (that is the taxpayer) have to pay a price for the incompetence of our babus,politicos and wher they can be found accountable,the miltary too.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 31 Jul 2009 15:52

I hope you do realise that the submarine museum is our very own INS Kursura and not the PNS Ghazi. only a few parts of ghazi were ever recovered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Kursura_S20

in this case DDM was being even more dense than usual and that's saying something.

yep you are right Rahul,sorry my bad,Thanks

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 31 Jul 2009 19:20

India plans to build 100 warships

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 31 Jul 2009 19:47

x-posting
Boeing shows off sub-seeking Poseidon jet

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 01 Aug 2009 00:25

kidoman wrote: Heyyy i thought PNS Ghazi still rests somewhere in the waters of BoB.

Yes, the submarine still rests on the ocean floor.

In 1990's there was an effort to bring out some parts of the PNS Ghazi, as part of some IN's practise session.

IN retrieved a glass observation dome and other parts of the PNS Ghazi and donated to the Visakha museum. BTW, any medaiperson who cared, would have found Visakha museum, in a 10-min walk (Northeast) along the beach road from Submarine museum (aka. INS Karsura).

Visakha Museum
Map

Here is the part that irritates me most when PNS Ghazi is mentioned.

Again sometime in 90's, Pakistan team flew to Vizag for a match and they were taken to visit Visakha museum. I read in the newspaper next day, that (in the enormous wisdom), the power-be removed the exhibit temporarily, glass dome of PNS Ghazi. We did not want to hurt the sentiments of visitors!!!!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Aug 2009 02:17

S1000 for Indian Navy's Project-75A?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Aug 2009 02:47

S1000 Characteristics

Length overall 56,20m
Outer diameter of pressure hull 5,50m
Submerged displacement about 1100 type
Diving depth >250 m
Draft 5,40 m
Stern rudders 4 X type
Maximum submerged speed >14 knots

PROPULSION PLANT
1 multi electronic permanent magnet propulsion motor 1000 kW
Diesel engines (turbocharged) 2 x 715 kW
Generators 2 x 650 kW
2 battery banks of 112 lead cells each in 2 separate compartments
AIP capability (Fuel cell based) 200 kW
1 propeller shaft, 7 skewed blades

SUBMERGED ENDURANCE
Snort + Batteries at 4 knots 3000 N.M.
Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) at 4 knots 1000 N.M.
Crew + special forces 16 + 6

COMBAT SYSTEM
6 Fwd Torpedo Tubes (Push-Out Type) with capability to
manage a combination of up to 6 + 8:
- 21 inches (533 mm) Wire Guided Torpedoes
- Antiship / Strike Missiles

Bottom Mines
Torpedo Countermeasures System (Emulator/Decoy)
5 Multifunction CMS Consoles,
Integrating sensors and navigation
1 Passive/Active Sonar Suite
(Conformal Array, Intercept Array, Mine Avoidance, ONA)
Integrated Navigation System

Underwater Telephone
1 x Optronic Mast (TV IR, Laser Range Finder/ESM early warning)
1 x ESM, for automatic intercepted
radar classification through own libraries

1 x Navigation Radar with ARPA facilities
Internal Communication System

2 x integrated external communication masts for voice and data
communications in the frequencies HF, UHF, UHF-SATCOM, VHF
1 x VLF antenna

Edited incorrect Wikipedia info.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Aug 2009 02:54

After this second line of subs, we would have had enough of torpedo and Anti ship missile subs. What we need is VLS SLCM/SLBM equipped land attack subs, and with large number of VLS cells.
No SDRE concepts need come into play. Just like massa, if one sub is parked off any nation's shores, it should have enough conventional firepower volume to completely annihilate the adversary.
That will be threatening enough for Minimum Credible Deterrent to work.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 01 Aug 2009 02:55

edited: Gagan posted corrected info

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Aug 2009 03:04

Guys in the time (5 Mins) of me posting that info on the S 1000 sub from Wikipedia, I find that that page has been edited and now points to the fincantieri page for the specs.

Apparantly wikipedia editors are at it round the clock.

John · Post by **John** » 01 Aug 2009 03:21

After this second line of subs, we would have had enough of torpedo and Anti ship missile subs. What we need is VLS SLCM/SLBM equipped land attack subs, and with large number of VLS cells.

Submarines especially diesel are in in effective in that role due to their speed and their cost (scorpene's are coming out close 750 mill per submarine). Plus the minute you fire the missiles you are sitting duck for PN's P-3s.

As for S1000 and P75A i do not think IN is too confident with P-75 (Scorpene) Project with delays, price and its performance compared with other submarines. So not surprised they are hedging their bets on different class of submarines.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 01 Aug 2009 03:40

Gagan wrote:Guys in the time (5 Mins) of me posting that info on the S 1000 sub from Wikipedia, I find that that page has been edited and now points to the fincantieri page for the specs. Apparantly wikipedia editors are at it round the clock.

The article is good! Have another look on wiki.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 01 Aug 2009 05:10

Warship project delayed to build up private sector.

In the hot Kolkata sun, on the banks of the Hooghly river, craftsmen from Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers (GRSE) swarm over what will be the Indian Navy’s most high-tech stealth warship. For GRSE, the navy’s order for four anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvettes is its flagship project. But Project 28, as it is termed, is two years behind schedule.

The first corvette was to join the fleet early next year. Business Standard discovered, during a first-ever media visit to this secretive project, that it will be delivered only in June 2012. The other three corvettes of Project 28 will follow at one-year intervals.

The major reason for the delay: the Indian Navy has stipulated such unprecedented standards of stealth for every piece of equipment on board that suppliers have struggled to develop engines, transmission, air-conditioning and power-generating systems that work silently enough to meet those requirements. Furthermore, the navy mandated that Indian suppliers would provide much of that equipment.

The Project 28 corvettes are 2,500-tonne warships that will protect Indian Navy battle groups and coastal installations from lurking enemy submarines. In the deadly cat-and-mouse game between ASW corvettes and submarines, the stealthier vessel is usually the winner, detecting and destroying its opponent after sneaking up undetected. The challenge of Project 28 has been to minimise vibrations and noise from the ship’s machinery, propellers, and from water swirling past the hull.

Success has come late in developing some of this equipment. The Kirloskar group has delivered the engines, albeit after a delay. Earlier this year, DCNS of France supplied the Raft Mounted Gearbox, which almost completely suppresses noise from the power pack. But Wartsila India is still struggling to reduce vibration in the four diesel alternators that will power the corvette’s electronics.

Once all this is in place, six huge spaces will have to be cut open in the corvette’s hull, through which giant cranes will lower monster-sized equipment like the 65-tonne engines. Then the hull will be welded shut once again.

For the navy, which has implemented indigenisation as something of a religion — the Naval Headquarters includes a full-fledged Directorate of Indigenisation — the delay in Project 28 is a regrettable, but acceptable, consequence of its twin objectives: building cutting edge warships and, simultaneously, developing an Indian warship building industry.

The Navy Chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta told Business Standard the navy had carefully laid down stealth standards that were absolutely necessary in war. Admiral Mehta explained, “We cannot compromise operational requirements for suppliers who are having difficulties meeting standards. We cannot come second in war.”

The navy’s top designer, Rear Admiral M K Badhwar, says the navy is determined to nurture an Indian supplier base, to develop increasingly high-tech products for warships. He points out, “Initially, they (the private companies) had real problems in meeting the sophistication levels that we were demanding. But we insisted and now most of them have done so. This is vital for an indigenous shipbuilding industry.”

All this has taken the cost of Project 28 from a sanctioned Rs 2,800 crore (Rs 700 crore per corvette), to an estimated Rs 7,000 crore now. This is approximately in line with cost increases for previous Indian-built warships.

GRSE’s Chairman and Managing Director, Rear Admiral K C Sekhar, explains, “Fortunately, our shipyard will not take a financial hit, since this was a cost-plus contract (in which the actual cost of construction of the first ship will be the basis for paying for the entire project). But we have learned valuable lessons. The complexity of the project was totally underestimated.”

The Project 28 corvettes, when they join the navy’s fleet, will be silent and heavily armed. An Otomelara Super Rapid Gun Mount (SRGM) on the bow can pour 76 millimetre shells onto aerial and surface targets. Flanking it will be two Indigenous Rocket Launchers (IRLs) that can fire at both submarines and ships. Submarines can also be engaged through six torpedo tubes. Two AK 630 Gatling guns, one on either side, can shoot down attacking aircraft. Finally, vertically launched missiles are likely to be mounted for engaging surface targets.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 01 Aug 2009 07:38

India plans to build 100 warships (FT)

koti · Post by **koti** » 01 Aug 2009 10:05

An interview with a Russian diplomat.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... e\/365376/

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 01 Aug 2009 14:56

Frankly speaking, IN seems to be very very very ......... serious about indigenisation. There are 2 others who can learn many things from them

Once the local supplier base is established it will help reduce the cost of future projects. So, it's a good investment of the long term.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 01 Aug 2009 15:06

Photos of P-24 ASW corvettes. (Courtesy: Ajai Shukla, Broadsword)

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Aug 2009 15:56

How on earth are we going to achieve a "100 ships" built in 10 years? Just look at the report on the two year delay of the P-28 corvette being built at Graden Reach and the shipyard struggling to find/develop the stealth technology required! Garden Reach took 10 years to build a Brahmaputra class frigate."Hull being cut open to insert machinery" Wonderful! With this antiquated technique of warship building ,it is going to be another successful delayed venture,typical of Indian shipbuilding.Worldwide,modular techniques of shipbuilding are being practised and the decision to build all the P-17A frigates at Garden Reach and MD,despite the Navy chief's desire to have the first few built abroad will comeback to haunt us.Will there be heads rolling for the delays of the P-28? Why is it that we castigae foreign yards about delays while cooly ignoring the incompetence of our own? Russia under Putin is sacking even top celebrated heads for failure.The GOI should start doing the same .

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 01 Aug 2009 19:07

Factor in the shipyards of ABG, Bharti, Pipavav, Mundra and L&T.Plus the additional investments at Mazgaon Docks, GRSE and the Goa shipyard.

John · Post by **John** » 02 Aug 2009 00:02

All this has taken the cost of Project 28 from a sanctioned Rs 2,800 crore (Rs 700 crore per corvette), to an estimated Rs 7,000 crore now. This is approximately in line with cost increases for previous Indian-built warships.

The Project 28 corvettes, when they join the navy’s fleet, will be silent and heavily armed. An Otomelara Super Rapid Gun Mount (SRGM) on the bow can pour 76 millimetre shells onto aerial and surface targets. Flanking it will be two Indigenous Rocket Launchers (IRLs) that can fire at both submarines and ships. Submarines can also be engaged through six torpedo tubes. Two AK 630 Gatling guns, one on either side, can shoot down attacking aircraft. Finally, vertically launched missiles are likely to be mounted for engaging surface targets.

Good article 1500 crore per corvette that is quite a lot considering their armament, considering the size of these vessels why not deploy a smaller class of corvette like Baynunah class 880 million for class of 6.