Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

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.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2334
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 18 Nov 2013 19:42

chackojoseph wrote:
Kartik wrote:Can someone please explain why the f**k will 6 conventional diesel subs with AIP and Brahmos end up costing us nearly $2 billion each?! How is such an absurd amount being bandied about and how on earth is the MoD or the IN able to justify such a ridiculous amount for a diesel sub?


P-15A is $1.8 Billion. Just imagine.

I think you meant to say P-15B (30k Crore for 4 vessels)? We won't know finally tally for Kolkata but from what i last heard it is around 800 million/each.

MN Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 27 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby MN Kumar » 18 Nov 2013 19:49

India's maritime hawk completes 25 years of yeomen service
NEW DELHI: Quietly keeping a hawk-eye on hostile warships, submarines, pirates and other inimical forces in the wide Indian Ocean Region (IOR), the Tupolev-142M aircraft have now clocked 25 years of operations in the Navy without a single accident.

The world's largest and fastest turboprop aircraft, aptly named the "Albatross" or the "Mighty Bird", the TU-142M planes first joined the INAS 312 maritime reconnaissance squadron from Russia in 1988.

On Monday, the TU-142M's silver jubilee was celebrated at naval air station INS Rajali in Arakkonam in Tamil Nadu, with Eastern Naval Command chief Vice admiral Anil Chopra reviewing the flypast and parad.

Though the seven fuel-guzzling TU-142M aircraft in the squadron have clearly aged, the Navy says they are still "effective force-multipliers" that are always in the "forefront" of all maritime operations.

"TU-142Ms were the first true LRMR (long-range, maritime reconnaissance) patrol aircraft of the Navy. They have performed yeomen service over the years. Having undergone overhauls and life-extensions in Russia, we plan to keep them in service till at least 2018," said an officer.

With a 50-metre wing-span and a range of over 12,000 km, the TU-142M has a speed of around 850 kmph. "They also have the highest flying altitude among turboprops, with an operational ceiling of over 13,000 metre," he said.

Apart from snooping, the TU-142Ms also have potent anti-submarine and electronic warfare capabilities. "They have a 10-member crew, fitted as they are with lot of sensors. They can also carry at least five torpedoes as well as freefall bombs and depth charges," he said.

The TU-142Ms will gradually be replaced by the dozen P-8I aircraft India is buying from the US for around $3.5 billion. Under the first $2.1 billion contract inked with Boeing in January 2009, the second of the eight contracted P-8I touched down at INS Rajali earlier this month. "All eight will be delivered by 2015," said another officer.

Armed with deadly Harpoon Block-II missiles, MK-54 lightweight torpedoes, rockets and depth charges, the radar-packed P-8I aircraft will be India's "intelligent hawk-eyes" over the IOR that is increasingly getting militarized.

China in particular has stepped up its submarine activity in the IOR as well as systematically forged extensive maritime linkages with eastern Africa, Seychelles, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Pakistan, among others.

With a maximum speed of 907 kmph and an operating range of over 1,200 nautical miles, "with four hours on station", the P-8Is will be able to detect "threats" — and neutralize them if required — far before they come anywhere near Indian shores.

Much like the TU-142Ms, the P-8Is will work in conjunction with medium-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft and Israeli Searcher-II and Heron UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) to establish an effective three-tier surveillance grid in IOR.

Apart from the need to take care of its primary area of strategic interest stretching from Persian Gulf to Malacca Strait, India also has a vast 5,422-km coastline, 1,197 islands and 2.01 million sq km of Exclusive Economic Zone to guard against all threats. "The P-8Is will help in this," said the officer.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7414
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby nachiket » 19 Nov 2013 04:37

I believe the key factor is time and the subsequent Rupee/$ depreciation and military inflation thats runs twice the civil inflation. So any value and payments would be adjusted to yearly inflation over the period when the final sub gets delivered.

Austin, Rupee depreciation explains how the price in Rupees goes up (same amount of dollars translate into more Rupees). It does not explain how the price in Dollars itself goes up by such an amount. Inflation alone can't increase the price almost four times in Dollar terms in just a few years. Have to agree with Kartik. $2 billion for a diesel sub is ludicrous. Are they replacing the anechoic tiles with gold bars I wonder?

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9745
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Nov 2013 05:19

No gold bars. Please understand. Rajiv formula.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20512
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 19 Nov 2013 06:51

The huge disparity in range between the TU-142s and P-8s requires that we nurse these "albatrosses" for as long as is usefully possible.The increasing range of stand-off land attack cruise missiles fired from warships and subs,the Tomahawak for example,requires LRMP aircraft with capability like the TU-142 to prosecute the missile carriers above and below water.Designed originally as a bomber,the TU-95 still serves in large numbers in Russia for the same purpose along with supersonic Blackjacks,just as the US still operates its B-52s.Russia is developing a new strategic stealth bomber apart from the SU-34.While the P-8Is with their sensors and weapons are a step up from the slower P-3s,both the bears in service and IL-38s would still play a very significant role in long range patrols equipped with Brahmos and Nirbhay and ASW weaponry,as well as the "low and slow" ASW operations respectively.Russia still has several dozen mothballed aircraft of the two types.Should the need arise a few could be acquired for war reserves/spare aircraft.

The frontiers of our maritime defence do not begin at the A&N islands or the entrances to the IOR,they begin in the adjacent seas.The Bears have the range to take the battle right into the Indo-China Sea and beyond.

PS:Great contribution by China to the Philippines after the devastating typhoon.Amount? $100,000! It gave Pak $20M after an earthquake.China is using in the Indo-China Sea,its "cabbage" strategy devised by Gen.Zhang Zhaozhong of the PLAN,wrapping up the numerous islands of the Indo-China Sea with warships,fishing vessels,surveillance eqpt. and in cases even occupying rocky uninhabited islands with troops.India must network with these threatened nations so that we can acquire forward surveillance assets and if need be logistic and mil. bases just as the PLAN will occupy Gwadar

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2013 08:32

nachiket wrote:Austin, Rupee depreciation explains how the price in Rupees goes up (same amount of dollars translate into more Rupees). It does not explain how the price in Dollars itself goes up by such an amount. Inflation alone can't increase the price almost four times in Dollar terms in just a few years. Have to agree with Kartik. $2 billion for a diesel sub is ludicrous. Are they replacing the anechoic tiles with gold bars I wonder?


Well they do ........Military inflation plays a big part in price escalation and military inflation for high tech products runs 2x time of over all inflation...... while we really do not know of the final cost of P-75I will be $11 billion but it would be substantial more than the $3.2 billion we paid for Scorpene in 2005 and Scorpene did not have AIP or VLS system.

My guess is P-75I would cost any where between $8-10 billion

Even MMRCA cost have gone up for the $6 billion we heard way back in 2002 to 8-10-12-16 and now $22 Billion is what we hear near 4x time the price the project was conceived

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 19 Nov 2013 08:51

So, what exactly is "Military inflation" in that case?

And, why would a "Military inflation" go up by that much in that short a period of time - outside of greed and such? Is there any measurable factor out there?

Misraji
BRFite
Posts: 401
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 11:53
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Misraji » 19 Nov 2013 08:56

"Military Inflation" .... Lahori Logic to the rescue!!!! .... :rotfl:

--Ashish.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 19 Nov 2013 09:03

Its when otherwise respected posters start using used car salesman terminology that we usually have a problem.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 19 Nov 2013 09:04

what is the estimated cost for the scorpenes ?

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2013 09:17

Rahul M wrote:what is the estimated cost for the scorpenes ?


It was around $3 -3.5 Billion fixed price contract IIRC

Military Inflation is a fact of life read up on ex Mil Personal writing on FORCE and others have stated it so ......and it runs double to civi inflation for hi tech products

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 19 Nov 2013 09:20

John wrote:I think you meant to say P-15B (30k Crore for 4 vessels)? We won't know finally tally for Kolkata but from what i last heard it is around 800 million/each.


P-15A is 1.8 bil $ each.

Funnily, with an order book of 65 billion $, MDL shows 2 billion $ turnover per year. Only two boats in construction were P-15A and Scorpene.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 19 Nov 2013 10:44

^^^

They cannot build ships quickly enough. It was one of the reason why the JV with PIPAV contemplated. Which in turn was scuppered by the Saint. Amid cries of corruption.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5033
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kartik » 19 Nov 2013 11:44

Austin, there is no way I'm buying your argument on military inflation..if the MoD is citing $11.2 billion already for the P-75I, these will be the most outrageously expensive diesel subs in the history of mankind..what the hell is being stuffed in them to make them as expensive as brand new nuke subs??

Scrap the bloody P-75I RFP and order more Scorpenes from MDL and DCNS with AIP and with Brahmos firing capability. it only makes sense to amortize the cost of the Scorpene assembly line by ordering more of the same with additional capabilities that the IN wants. It makes no sense whatsoever to pay such an obscene amount for a new line of subs when they bring no major capability that current generation diesel subs (which cost in the hundreds of millions, not billions) don't already possess.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2013 11:55

Kartik wrote:Austin, there is no way I'm buying your argument on military inflation..if the MoD is citing $11.2 billion already for the P-75I, these will be the most outrageously expensive diesel subs in the history of mankind..what the hell is being stuffed in them to make them as expensive as brand new nuke subs??


Yes the figures quoted of $11.2 is outrageously expensive and I believe they have been picked out from someones mussharaf ...... we need to wait till RFP gets response and final figures come out/

Scrap the bloody P-75I RFP and order more Scorpenes from MDL and DCNS with AIP and with Brahmos firing capability. it only makes sense to amortize the cost of the Scorpene assembly line by ordering more of the same with additional capabilities that the IN wants. It makes no sense whatsoever to pay such an obscene amount for a new line of subs when they bring no major capability that current generation diesel subs (which cost in the hundreds of millions, not billions) don't already possess


I have been stating that for years we dont need two lines of sub , complicating logistics , Just build more scorpene in block model and add capability to it like the way US builds virginia class SSN with each block increasing indiginous capability and final block 4 getting 100 % indiginous.

Block 1 , Scorpene Plain Vanila ( 6 )
Block 2 , Scorpene with AIP ( 6 more )
Block 3 , Scorpene with AIP and VLS ( bigger one similar to Spanish S80 )
Block 4 , 100 % indiginous Scorpene with Sonar , AIP , Weapons , command control , ESM all indiginous as far as possible.

There you get 24 scorpene built in progressive block model add capability and with Block 4 achieving 100 % indiginous capability ....it reduces cost , streamlines logistics and have progressive indiginous capability

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 19 Nov 2013 13:42

Austin,

Your suggestion is quite rational and that is the reason why it will never be implemented. :((

Another idea may be to use the skill developed for the Arihant class and use the same to develop a DE Boat. That may as a follow up to the Block 3 that you have mentioned above.

But as it will still take 10 to 15 years to develop.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 19 Nov 2013 14:06

Pratyush wrote:^^^

They cannot build ships quickly enough. It was one of the reason why the JV with PIPAV contemplated. Which in turn was scuppered by the Saint. Amid cries of corruption.


See, MDL is responsible for hulls. It builds hulls rapidly and keeps it. Then comes Naval designers's who do even day to day design changes. The comes equipment suppliers. Then Navy. While first ship is on trial, they send feed back for second whip, which is incorporated. All adds to delay.

Scorpene you already know.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 19 Nov 2013 14:45

^^^

Makes no sense to me. Cause the ship of the Navy has to be built to a particular design. This design has to be finished, before the first metal is cut and the keel is laid.

If you are going to design a ship when its hull is complete and then start to look for systems to fit in that ship. Then you are going to have huge delays and cost overruns.

Wait, we are already facing this issue, and have been facing it for the last so many years.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2013 15:31

Came across the Barak-8 data http://www.naval-technology.com/project ... -missiles/

The missile will have a length of about 4.5m, diameter of 0.54m and a wingspan of 0.94m. It can travel at a maximum speed of Mach 2, with an operational range of 70km.

Is mach 2 speed good enough for a long range SAM ?

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 19 Nov 2013 15:59

Pratyush wrote:^^^

Makes no sense to me. Cause the ship of the Navy has to be built to a particular design. This design has to be finished, before the first metal is cut and the keel is laid.

If you are going to design a ship when its hull is complete and then start to look for systems to fit in that ship. Then you are going to have huge delays and cost overruns.

Wait, we are already facing this issue, and have been facing it for the last so many years.


You have described cost escalation already. Tell that to Naval design bureau or try giving such a contract to foreign shipyard. If MDL completes hulls and keeps it, folks accuse it of invoicing, funny, isn't it? Anyway, they are churning hulls faster and putting them in water so that more hulls can be made and fitments can be made faster after the first example. Shivalik class being an example.

Indian Naval Ship set to sail with additional relief material for Typhoon Haiyan ravaged Philippines

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2932
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 19 Nov 2013 17:35

Austin wrote:Came across the Barak-8 data http://www.naval-technology.com/project ... -missiles/

The missile will have a length of about 4.5m, diameter of 0.54m and a wingspan of 0.94m. It can travel at a maximum speed of Mach 2, with an operational range of 70km.

Is mach 2 speed good enough for a long range SAM ?
Actual released IAI specifications say "greater than Mach 2".

FWIW, USN keeps ESSM speed classified http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_displ ... d=950&ct=2
Speed: Classified. Range: Classified.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20512
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 19 Nov 2013 17:48

http://www.asianage.com/columnists/chin ... change-445

China’s short change


China’s short change
Nov 19, 2013
Sreeram Chaulia

When an earthquake hit Pakistan in 2005, China proudly advertised that its assistance exceeded $20 million. So, why did the Philippines get shortchanged with a niggardly Chinese response?

When Super Typhoon Haiyan struck central Philippines and killed thousands of people, the entire international community responded with magnanimous aid towards relief and rescue efforts. But China stood out like a sore thumb. Despite being an immediate neighbour of the Philippines, the Chinese government announced a petty sum of $100,000 that was proportionately worthless in the wake of Haiyan’s vast devastation.
After a chorus of international criticism arose against Beijing’s mean-spirited stinginess, its contribution grew to $1.64 million, which is still a drop in the ocean compared to the generosity of other regional actors. Japan committed $10 million. South Korea opened its purses to give $5 million. Indonesia chipped in with $2 million. Australia gave a sizeable sum of $28 million.
Countries which are geographically distant from the Philippines also rushed in with large aid packages. The UK provided $32 million, while the European Commission shelled out $11 million. The United Arab Emirates, with no discernible strategic stake or economic interests in the Philippines, donated $10 million. India, which is also not in the vicinity of the Philippines, dispatched plenty of relief materials and personnel to the epicentre of the disaster in Tacloban. Last, but not least, the United States pledged $20 million.
Why did China behave with obnoxious miserliness towards the Philippines when everyone else came out with maximum possible solidarity for human suffering? Does China not have a heart? And what does Chinese irresponsibility towards a near neighbour like the Philippines tell us about the kind of world order Asia is going to experience under Beijing’s command?
China’s unkind gesture to the Philippines in an hour of need is all the more revealing because the former has actually become a huge donor for humanitarian relief in natural disasters across Asia. When the Indian Ocean tsunami plunged nations in South and Southeast Asia into grief, China emerged tall and munificent with overall aid of $40 million. When a killer earthquake rocked Pakistan in 2005, China proudly advertised that its assistance exceeded $20 million. Even Japan, with whom China has an adversarial relationship, got $10 million of Chinese aid after the major earthquake and tsunami of 2011. So, why did the Philippines get shortchanged with a niggardly Chinese response?
The bad blood generated by island disputes in the South China Sea has coloured perceptions of the Philippines in the minds of Chinese policymakers and citizens with extreme negativity. The Philippines has been the most vocal resister of China’s bullying tactics against Southeast Asian nations. Even Vietnam, which has no love lost with China over strategic competition, has not gone to the extent of the Philippines in contesting Chinese aggression over the disputed Spratly Islands in global forums.
The arbitration case lodged by the Philippines against China before an international tribunal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas is an embarrassment to China, which verbally touts adherence to international laws but discards established global norms when it suits Chinese interests.
The scariest aspect of Chinese assertions of force against tiny Philippines is the so-called “cabbage strategy” outlined by military theorist and Major General Zhang Zhaozhong of the People’s Liberation Army Navy. Like layers of a cabbage, China is wrapping disputed islands claimed by the Philippines with warships, fishing vessels and surveillance equipment to establish a fait accompli and engineer a takeover.
China’s grab of the Scarborough Shoal in 2012 by erecting barriers to entry for Filipino vessels is a foretaste of the cabbage strategy that has broken hopes of a Beijing that will respect international law and be a good neighbour. If China’s “salami-slicing” tactics are alarming Southeast Asians, its discriminatory and highly politicised call on aid to survivors of Super Typhoon Haiyan is deepening suspicion of Chinese foreign policy.
The peanuts that China threw at the Philippines after the Super Typhoon contrasts with the over $5 million in supplies it delivered to close ally Pakistan after a relatively small disaster (an earthquake) in September this year claimed only 500 lives. Joshua Kurlantzick, a specialist on China’s soft power “charm offensive”, argues that China’s coldshouldering of the Philippines when it sorely needed help is “another sign of Beijing’s departure from its 1990s/early 2000s soft power strategy of investing in building long-term ties in Southeast Asia while minimising disagreements.”
Neglecting the long-term and rubbing it in when a next-door neighbour is picking up pieces from a natural calamity is the exact inverse of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s recent promise to seek a friendly neighbourhood. President Xi mean instructed Chinese diplomats at a high-level foreign policy meeting last month to strive for “a sound neighbouring environment”. Is there any logic to his message at that gathering that “dealing with neighbouring countries should have a three-dimensional, multi-element perspective, beyond time and space”?
China missed an opportunity to address the basic human dimension of trying to assist a typhoon-crippled Philippines owing to steady demonisation of a feisty neighbour for nationalistic propaganda purposes. China forfeited a chance to demonstrate regional leadership, which counts the most during a crisis or tragedy. Beijing does dole out vast amounts of aid in Southeast Asia for infrastructure building and resource extraction projects, implying that Beijing is a self-centred and exploitative patron. Where there is no direct economic benefit in sight, and if the victim is a political irritant like the Philippines, China’s heart goes cold.
Chinese state-run media outlets are alleging that Japan and the US are slyly using Super Typhoon Haiyan to insert their militaries into the Philippines and execute the American “pivot to Asia.” But the same “intentions hidden behind the humanitarian aid”, which Beijing is imputing to Japan and America, are also attributable to Chinese aid policies. The typhoon aftermath has further soiled China’s reputation as a pursuer of naked power politics that cannot be trusted to do the morally correct thing. Why would the rest of Asia accept a mingy and spiteful hegemon?

The writer is a professor and dean at the Jindal School of International Affairs

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2334
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 19 Nov 2013 20:41

chackojoseph wrote:
John wrote:I think you meant to say P-15B (30k Crore for 4 vessels)? We won't know finally tally for Kolkata but from what i last heard it is around 800 million/each.


P-15A is 1.8 bil $ each.

Funnily, with an order book of 65 billion $, MDL shows 2 billion $ turnover per year. Only two boats in construction were P-15A and Scorpene.



Joseph, Do you have the link for the price of Kolkata?


tsarkar wrote:FWIW, USN keeps ESSM speed classified http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_displ ... d=950&ct=2
Speed: Classified. Range: Classified.

I believe similar to Aster or even Barak 8 the speed varies with target and distance the intercept will take place, the missile flies highly optimized flight path. That is one of the reason they have much long ranges than lets say Talos or Akash which fly a direct flight path.

For ESSM which has smaller warhead and doesn't active seeker should have longer range than Barak-8/Aster-30, so I highly doubt even the quoted 50 km range by wiki is correct. i would not be surprised if true range is double that. But USN has SM-2 to handle targets at longer ranges'.
Last edited by John on 19 Nov 2013 20:50, edited 1 time in total.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 19 Nov 2013 20:47

John,

Its generally known approx 225% increase in cost. $500 odd mil a piece bloats to that.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2334
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 19 Nov 2013 20:51

chackojoseph wrote:John,

Its generally known approx 225% increase in cost. $500 odd mil a piece bloats to that.


Haha will see but to be accurate currently the cost is currently around ~800-900 million.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20512
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 20 Nov 2013 08:03

If the Scorpene -2 whatever costs even more than the current 6,it will be goodbye.Unless the new subs carry BMos-and there is no western equivalent,the front runner will be a Russian design with Bmos and an AIP system.The costs will be at least $100m less than a Scorpene and in the era of financial famine,the cheapest that meets all requirements will be king.Some measure of common eqpt. may be asked for by the IN on the new boats.Being components,they may appear on a Russian boat as was proposed in the Russo-Italian JV.Russia may have also worked out a package for the second Akula plus the 75Is.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5033
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kartik » 20 Nov 2013 09:21

Philip wrote:If the Scorpene -2 whatever costs even more than the current 6,it will be goodbye.Unless the new subs carry BMos-and there is no western equivalent,the front runner will be a Russian design with Bmos and an AIP system.The costs will be at least $100m less than a Scorpene and in the era of financial famine,the cheapest that meets all requirements will be king.Some measure of common eqpt. may be asked for by the IN on the new boats.Being components,they may appear on a Russian boat as was proposed in the Russo-Italian JV.Russia may have also worked out a package for the second Akula plus the 75Is.


and what about the cost of setting up a new assembly line, with the attendant training of manpower? That'll end up costing hundreds of millions of $ more. it is most economically sensible to get more Scorpenes from the existing assembly line and iteratively increasing its capabilities, rather than adding a new type and setting up a new assembly line. Its foolhardiness to have 2 assembly lines, neither of which are used to their fullest capacity.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 20 Nov 2013 10:49

^^^

IMO, the cost of yard assembly is not that high. Nor is the cost of training for new designs at the yard level. As long as basic welding and steel cutting skills are in place. Material costs may change or rise as a result of different and newer materials. The cost / ton of different grade of steels is also an issue, eg HY 80 will have different cost / ton when compared to HY 100.

The real challenge would be in the implementation of the design at the yard level. But if the yard has skilled program & quality managers, then this stops being an issue.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 20 Nov 2013 11:08

John wrote:Haha will see but to be accurate currently the cost is currently around ~800-900 million.


I could be wrong. But, here is one link

The major indigenous warship building projects of the Navy running behind schedule are Project-15A, Project-17 and Project-28. The cost escalation in these projects has been about 225% for Project-15A, about 260% for Project-17 and about 157% for Project-28.

As per Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkata-class_destroyer

Initially in 2008, each vessel and its long-term spare parts was expected to cost INR3800 crore (US$580 million),[26] but the ship's construction costs escalated over 225% during the course of their build, and by 2011, cost of each warship became INR11662 crore (US$1.8 billion).

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 20 Nov 2013 11:11

tsarkar wrote:Is mach 2 speed good enough for a long range SAM ?Actual released IAI specifications say "greater than Mach 2".


tsarkar do you have the IAI specification that says so ? I tried to check on their website couldnt find any.

Most likely mach 2 is the average speed than top speed of Barak-8

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 20 Nov 2013 12:01

Misraji wrote:"Military Inflation" .... Lahori Logic to the rescue!!!! .... :rotfl:

--Ashish.

Unfortunately it is not; if you buy a bottle of Bisleri for say INR 30 the services will but the same for at least INR 80 that is how procurement works in India. Oh btw the way what is most funny part of this chootiyapa is that it is because of CAG and it's military counterpart CDA that military ends up paying more than twice for items. The archiac auditing and bean counting techniques mean services cannot buy stuff for housekeeping activities from the market as every payment has to be audited before the cheques are cleared so a layer of middlemen exists which actually buy stuff for services while the auduting bodies go through the paperwork, these middlemen charge that extra overhead for buying the bottle of Bisleri on behalf of the services and get paid later by the services after bean counters have cleared the transaction.

You can imagine what will happen when IA or IN want to buy spares for expensive MIL hardware. Above happens for even buying brooms and mops for ships. :mrgreen:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 20 Nov 2013 13:31

^^^

The lack of designing and building weapons at home is also costing the Indian Navy dearly. The hull may be Indian. But ranging from the propulsion plant to the weapons nearly every thing is imported, with minor exceptions being made in India. That is what creates a huge problem.

On top of that, the equipment is ordered under yearly contracts. Instead of a long term supply contract, wherein, the supplier is assured that he will supply the equipment and its related spare parts for the whole of service life.

That being the case we see instances, where the spare part is more expensive then the original item and yet the spare part is purchased. As the LOI is for the spare part and not the new item.

Another instance that we see, especially where the Russians are concerned is that, they will nearly never honor the terms of the original contract. They will sign the contract by quoting the least price, once the sale is made, they will subsequently jack up the price for the subsequent purchase.

In spite of all this the biggest weakness of the system is an absence of cost accountant's who have the ability to calculate the real life cycle costs for the purchased items.

This is what is killing us, when it comes to the cost of purchase for the IN.

FMS is a refreshingly different experience. But it comes with its own baggage.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 20 Nov 2013 14:50

negi wrote:
Misraji wrote:"Military Inflation" .... Lahori Logic to the rescue!!!! .... :rotfl:

--Ashish.

Unfortunately it is not; if you buy a bottle of Bisleri for say INR 30 the services will but the same for at least INR 80 that is how procurement works in India. Oh btw the way what is most funny part of this chootiyapa is that it is because of CAG and it's military counterpart CDA that military ends up paying more than twice for items. The archiac auditing and bean counting techniques mean services cannot buy stuff for housekeeping activities from the market as every payment has to be audited before the cheques are cleared so a layer of middlemen exists which actually buy stuff for services while the auduting bodies go through the paperwork, these middlemen charge that extra overhead for buying the bottle of Bisleri on behalf of the services and get paid later by the services after bean counters have cleared the transaction.

You can imagine what will happen when IA or IN want to buy spares for expensive MIL hardware. Above happens for even buying brooms and mops for ships. :mrgreen:

negi ji, you are confusing a price markup or margin with inflation. Unless you are saying Military Bisleri will cost 320 Rupees in a few years thanks to the World-famous-in-Russia factor of 4, you and Austin ji are not saying the same thing.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Peregrine » 20 Nov 2013 17:56

Antony pulls up Navy on INS Sindhurakshak sinking

NEW DELHI : Pulling up the Navy on the sinking of the INS Sindhurakshak submarine in which 18 personnel lost their lives, defence minister AK Antony on Wednesday asked the force "not to fritter away" such expensive national resources.

Against the backdrop of incidents where some naval officers have been allegedly involved in sex scandals, the defence minister said, "There have been some isolated cases which have proved to be a cause for serious concern and embarrassment.

"It is imperative to pay utmost attention to such instances and make earnest efforts to minimize, if not eliminate them," he said at the Naval commanders' conference.

On the INS Sindhurakshak incident, Antony said there was a need to "seriously reflect upon the unprecedented tragedy, analyse it and also draw lessons for future even as attempts to salvage the submarine and an inquiry to ascertain the possible cause of the accident is already under way."

Antony said, "It must be ensured that safety mechanisms are accorded topmost priority and standard operating procedures adhered to strictly and without any exception."

The defence minister observed that a significant amount of national resources are utilized for nation building capabilities and "it is the responsibility of the Navy to optimally operate and maintain these assets and hardware, as well as train its personnel suitably so that such national resources are optimally utilized and are not frittered away."

The Sindhurakshak had sunk on August 14 with 18 personnel on board and a board of inquiry is still on to find out the exact causes behind the accident.

Cheers Image

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2334
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 20 Nov 2013 22:02

chackojoseph wrote:
John wrote:Haha will see but to be accurate currently the cost is currently around ~800-900 million.


I could be wrong. But, here is one link

The major indigenous warship building projects of the Navy running behind schedule are Project-15A, Project-17 and Project-28. The cost escalation in these projects has been about 225% for Project-15A, about 260% for Project-17 and about 157% for Project-28.

As per Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkata-class_destroyer

Initially in 2008, each vessel and its long-term spare parts was expected to cost INR3800 crore (US$580 million),[26] but the ship's construction costs escalated over 225% during the course of their build, and by 2011, cost of each warship became INR11662 crore (US$1.8 billion).


That is wiki for you, if you notice the source which is quoting the cost for 3 vessels 11662 crore not per vessel. It is also puts 5514 crore for Talwar II, 8108 crore for Shivalik so obviously these are not per vessel costs. Those figures are not correct as well there was some price escalation with both Talwar II and Shivalik.

Shivalik cost around 650 million each and that was hit with numerous delays and not to mention uses more western equipment. So P-15A should cost around the same or less along with added cost of Barak-8+Radar. My bet would be around 800 million/each.

P-17A in other hand is skyrocketing and that could end up being the next Scorpene project...

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 20 Nov 2013 23:16

INS Kamorta runs aground

Not sure whether it was posted before

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... ing-trials

INS Kamorta, the Indian Navy's first Project-28 (P-28) Kamorta-class anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvette has run aground during sea trials off the Hooghly near Geonkhali in East Midnapore, India.
During the ongoing sea trials, INS Kamorta encountered engine failure while it was negotiating the bends of the Hooghly River, The Times of India reports.
Shortly after the engine failure, the steering gear also jammed, diverting the ship from the navigation channel and subsequently causing it to go aground near the shore at Geonkhali.
Built by Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers (GRSE), INS Kamorta is expected to be commissioned into the Indian Navy by the end of 2013.
Officers said the engines and steering gear failure may result in a delay in commissioning the ship with the Indian Navy, which was initially scheduled for the end of 2013.
A source said two tugs of the Kolkata Port Trust (KoPT) were sent to the spot to tow the ship back to GRSE for inspection and necessary repairs.
"The engines and steering gear failure may result in a delay in commissioning the ship with the Indian Navy."
A GRSE source said: "Now we will have to check the engines and the steering gear and make necessary changes."
According to the navy, extensive checks will be carried out on the ship while a team of naval designers and engineers will assess the cause for the failure of engine and the steering gear.
GRSE was previously awarded a contract by the Indian Navy to build and deliver four 109m-long and 2,500t project-28 ASW corvettes.
Equipped with integrated communication system and electronic warfare system, the Kamorta-class stealth corvettes feature anti-submarine warfare capability with a low signature of radiated underwater noise.
The ships of the class are fitted with super rapid gun mounting, anti-aircraft guns, torpedo launcher, rocket launcher and chaff launcher in addition to early-warning, navigation, fire-control radars and under-water

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby ramana » 21 Nov 2013 04:40

How do they plan to swap the egine and steering gear in a fully equipped ship?

vijh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 08 Jul 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vijh » 21 Nov 2013 05:19

RE China and the Philippines also see this report:

http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/201 ... china-sea/

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 21 Nov 2013 06:15

John wrote:
chackojoseph wrote: cost of each warship became INR11662 crore (US$1.8 billion).


if you notice the source which is quoting the cost for 3 vessels 11662 crore not per vessel.


PIB is the source. Strat post has not mentioned if that figure is for 3 or 1 . It just mentioned the price and named 3 ships.

Even mathematically, I cannot understand how an initial budget of 1.6 odd bil USD after 225% increase in cost becomes 1.8 odd bil USD .

I can understand if someone argues its approx 1.2 bil USD for a ship.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2334
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 21 Nov 2013 08:13

chackojoseph wrote:Even mathematically, I cannot understand how an initial budget of 1.6 odd bil USD after 225% increase in cost becomes 1.8 odd bil USD .

The initial allocatement was around 2500 crores for Shivalik and 3500 crores for P-15A. As i said earlier it should cost about the same as P-17s+Barak 8 from what i reading.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Galleries/News/Events/P-15A+Chennai+Launching/
According to MDL, the estimated cost of these destroyers, less ammunition and helicopters, should not exceed Rs. 3500 crores. Actual cost figures will not be available until the first of class is completed.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests