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.
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 09:30

Edited:

Maz has quoted 2010 figure. The costs have escalated since then.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8266
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 21 Nov 2013 10:01

^^^

If the cost escalation is not a cause to reform the navel procurement, then I don't know what is.

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 10:16

As I understand this problem, the cost of ship minus the weapon and helio has touched 1 bill dollar and above. If Antony says that some $400 mil is due to Russian steel, then we might have to find alternative source.
================================================
Added later:

Ok, I have some estimates. The ship - weapons etc may cost approx 1.1 - 1.3 bil $ per unit.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8266
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 21 Nov 2013 12:12

The steel is Indian.

It was either supplied by Essar Steel or by SAIL. But it is Indian. Even the HY 80 used for the T209 made by MDL in the 90s was Indian.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20881
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 22 Nov 2013 01:04

X-posted from the intl. td. The debate was about the exorbitant costs of Scorpenes and planned P-75-I costs.

We haven't been privy with the specs of the 75-Is,which I fear is why the est. costs of the deal is that high,far more than the Scorpenes.The Scorpenes were planned to extend the western line of conventional subs to deal primarily with the PN's Agosta-90Bs,in the aftermath of the HDW alleged scam,which prevented us from building more U-209/1500 U-boats.It was also perhaps a cute way in which Paki acquisition of a better French sub than the Agosta-90Bs was scuttled.Upgrades of the U-209s would keep the Germans happy for the interim,and they in any case were very reluctant to sell Pak their new U-boats because of the PLAN factor,Pak passing on sub secrets.As with Oz's future sub ambitions,a larger boat than the Scorpenes is probably planned for which will have a far greater capability than that of the Scorpenes,which are now much older in concept and in the IN's own words will be obsolete by the time the whole lot are inducted into the IN!

Newer more efficient AIP systems than the French MESMA are being developed,both fuel-cell and the Russian new battery development in the works which if successful would not require a fuel cell plug and its extra paraphenalia.A recent Russian report about s future 5th-gen subs indicates that some of them may in fact be non-nuclear.There was some speculation not too long ago about the Sarov design too.As for strike capability,how can one compare the Scorpene's subsonic Exocets with Brahmos? B'Mos is supersonic,has far more kinetic power than a sub-sonic missile,will reach its target far quicker,has greater terminal manoeuvring ability and a range advantage too.Our Kilos which will have to be progressively replaced by the new 75Is are larger in size and displacement than the Scorpenes.The subs will have a true blue-water ops priority with an endurance of at least 45 days.The weapons load carried would also be larger than that of the Scorpene,carrying B'Mos,Klub variants and Shkval too.Nirbhay once fully developed would be another essential weapon system.Now the current German U-boats and Scorpenes which are being supplied to various Asia-Pacific navies simply cannot meet the grade.A new design is required.Whether the larger Amur/Lada with BMos and AIP is a suitable solution for the 75I requirement is another issue.What one has to keep in mind is that a combination of both conventional new AIP boats and nuclear boats are required.The cost and maintenance of operating N-boats is being looked at even by navies such as Russia for both technical and eco. factors to complement each other in their respective strengths in combination.

Let me add some Cold War stats.It takes 3 N-subs in inventory to keep one on patrol.Therefore,even cost wise,one N-sub would cost twice as much as a conventional sub.Our current ATV design is around 6000t+,more than double the size of a Kilo.By this yardstick we would get 2 conventional AIP subs for one N-sub.The IN in my opinion would require at least 12 N-subs (5-6 SSBNs and 6 SSGNs) plus 24 conventional boats.This would give us a total of 36 subs-mini/midget subs not counted,to deal with 60-80 new Chinese subs,plus around a dozen Paki boats.I posted recently that Saudi Arabia is planning to acquire at speed a whopping 24 German U-boats ,5 already being negotiated/ordered,which will definitely carry the Sino-Paki cruise missile with a N-warhead.If the IN is going to sanitise both the IOR and venture into the Indo-China Sea as a first line of defence against any PLAN breakout into the IOR,especially by its sub force which last year made at least detected 22 intrusions,including N-boats,then a sub fleet as I've suggested will be the bare minimum to deal with these new multifarious threats.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3435
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 23 Nov 2013 23:16

Now that Viki is commissioned, P-15A is the most anticipated induction

Finally ... we get a sneak peak! Enjoy 8)

Image

titash
BRFite
Posts: 381
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby titash » 24 Nov 2013 00:19

Aditya G wrote:Now that Viki is commissioned, P-15A is the most anticipated induction

Finally ... we get a sneak peak! Enjoy 8)

Image


nice pic!

so the multi-function radar is approximately the same height as the top plate radar (must be due to top weight concerns). I was hoping for a taller mast and increased radar horizon like the type 45s

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 24 Nov 2013 10:59


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20881
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 24 Nov 2013 17:51

More Snowden exposes,that the US and its Asian allies,Oz,SPore,SoKo,are secretly tapping into undersea communication cables.This is of great importance and relevance to India too,as many undersea cables transit the IOR close to India from west to east.The IN must also develop its own equivalent to the US SOSUS undersea sensor system,which it has secretly located at all maritime chokepoints.

New Snowden leaks reveal US, Australia's Asian allies

Date
November 24, 2013 - 2:38PM

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/new-snowden ... z2lZDS9QP6
Philip Dorli
Singapore and South Korea are playing key roles helping the United States and Australia tap undersea telecommunications links across Asia, according to top secret documents leaked by former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden. New details have also been revealed about the involvement of Australia and New Zealand in the interception of global satellite communications.

A top secret United States National Security Agency map shows that the US and its “Five Eyes” intelligence partners tap high speed fibre optic cables at 20 locations worldwide. The interception operation involves cooperation with local governments and telecommunications companies or else through “covert, clandestine” operations.

The undersea cable interception operations are part of a global web that in the words of another leaked NSA planning document enables the “Five Eyes” partners – the US, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand - to trace “anyone, anywhere, anytime” in what is described as “the golden age” signals intelligence.

The NSA map, published by Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad overnight, shows that the United States maintains a stranglehold on trans-Pacific communications channels with interception facilities on the West coast of the United States and at Hawaii and Guam, tapping all cable traffic across the Pacific Ocean as well as links between Australia and Japan.
Advertisement

The map confirms that Singapore, one of the world's most significant telecommunications hubs, is a key “third party” working with the “Five Eyes” intelligence partners.

In August Fairfax Media reported that Australia's electronic espionage agency, the Defence Signals Directorate, is in a partnership with Singaporean intelligence to tap the SEA-ME-WE-3 cable that runs from Japan, via Singapore, Djibouti, Suez and the Straits of Gibraltar to Northern Germany.

Australian intelligence sources told Fairfax that the highly secretive Security and Intelligence Division of Singapore's Ministry of Defence co-operates with DSD in accessing and sharing communications carried by the SEA-ME-WE-3 cable as well as the SEA-ME-WE-4 cable that runs from Singapore to the south of France.

Access to this major international telecommunications channel, facilitated by Singapore's government-owned operator SingTel, has been a key element in an expansion of Australian-Singaporean intelligence and defence ties over the past 15 years.

Majority owned by Temask Holdings, the investment arm of the Singapore Government, SingTel has close relations with Singapore's intelligence agencies. The Singapore Government is represented on the company's board by the head of Singapore's civil service, Peter Ong, who was previously responsible for national security and intelligence co-ordination in the Singapore Prime Minister's office.

Australian intelligence expert, Australian National University Professor Des Ball has described Singapore's signal's intelligence capability as “probably the most advanced” in South East Asia, having first been developed in cooperation with Australia in the mid-1970s and subsequently leveraging Singapore's position as a regional telecommunications hub.

Indonesia and Malaysia have been key targets for Australian and Singaporean intelligence collaboration since the 1970s. Much of Indonesia's telecommunications and Internet traffic is routed through Singapore.

The leaked NSA map also shows South Korea is another key interception point with cable landings at Pusan providing access to the external communications of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

South Korea's National Intelligence Service has long been a close collaborator with the US Central Intelligence Agency and the NSA, as well as the Australian intelligence agencies. The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation recently engaged in legal action in an unsuccessful effort to prevent publication of details of South Korean espionage in Australia. ASIO Director-General David Irvine told the Federal Court that Australian and South Korean intelligence agencies had been cooperating for “over 30 years” and that any public disclose of NIS activities would be “detrimental” to Australia's national security.

The NSA map and other documents leaked by Mr Snowden and published by the Brazilian O Globo newspaper also reveal new detail on the integration of Australian and New Zealand signals intelligence facilities in the interception of satellite communications traffic by the “Five Eyes” partners.

For the first time it is revealed that the DSD satellite interception facility at Kojarena near Geraldton in Western Australia is codenamed “STELLAR”. The New Zealand Government Communications Security Bureau facility at Waihopai on New Zealand's South Island is codenamed “IRONSAND”. The codename for DSD's facility at Shoal Bay near Darwin is not identified. However all three facilities are listed by the NSA as “primary FORNSAT (foreign satellite communications) collection operations”.

Coverage of satellite communications across Asia and the Middle East is also supported by NSA facilities at the United States Air Force base at Misawa in Japan, US diplomatic premises in Thailand and India, and British Government Communications Headquarters facilities in Oman, Nairobi in Kenya and at the British military base in Cyprus.

The leaked NSA map also shows that undersea cables are accessed by the NSA and the British GCHQ through military facilities in Djibouti and Oman, thereby ensuring maximum coverage of Middle East and South Asian communications.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/new-snowden ... z2lZBjsuGe


PS:GIven the close relationship between SPore and the US intel agencies,a Q must be asked whether the BLore SPore intel park is a "trojan horse" in our IT industry

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4002
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 24 Nov 2013 21:59

some of the the old british libraries had some rooms with communications equipment ..used to think for what

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2429
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 25 Nov 2013 02:33

titash wrote:so the multi-function radar is approximately the same height as the top plate radar (must be due to top weight concerns). I was hoping for a taller mast and increased radar horizon like the type 45s

The mast actually looks enlarged to support the MF-Star radar compared to what we have with Delhi or Shivalik. Delhi's Half plate weights about 2 tons where as each each face of Star radar weights 1.5 ton each. Don't know how much Sampson weights but since it is single radar system i don't believe it weights as much, so its doubtful even Type 45 mast could support a radar system that heavy.
Last edited by John on 25 Nov 2013 03:54, edited 1 time in total.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 948
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby KrishnaK » 25 Nov 2013 02:55

Philip wrote:PS:GIven the close relationship between SPore and the US intel agencies,a Q must be asked whether the BLore SPore intel park is a "trojan horse" in our IT industry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Bangalore - Every single park in bangalore has heavy american presence. trojans all of them, we should throw them out. maybe we can have our russian friends fill the gap.

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1152
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby A Sharma » 25 Nov 2013 04:23

Boeing Delivers 3rd P-8I to India

SEATTLE, Nov. 22, 2013 – The third Boeing [NYSE: BA] P-8I long-range maritime reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft for the Indian Navy arrived today in India, on schedule.

The aircraft departed Boeing Field in Seattle for Naval Station Rajali, where it joined two P-8Is currently undergoing flight trials and testing. The first P-8I arrived in India in May.

The P-8I is one of eight aircraft Boeing is building for the Indian Navy as part of a contract awarded in 2009. Based on the company’s Next-Generation 737 commercial airplane, the P-8I is the Indian Navy variant of the P-8A Poseidon that Boeing has developed for the U.S. Navy. The P-8I incorporates not only India-unique design features, but also India-built subsystems that are tailored to the country’s maritime patrol requirements

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 25 Nov 2013 07:01

the APAR radar which is the closest analogue in size and look weigh around 2t per face. unless I am mistaken the aperture of the mf-star in pic above looks bigger than the APAR pic

http://img29.exs.cx/img29/5664/DeZeven_2jpg-2.jpg

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 317
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sohamn » 25 Nov 2013 07:38

KrishnaK wrote:
Philip wrote:PS:GIven the close relationship between SPore and the US intel agencies,a Q must be asked whether the BLore SPore intel park is a "trojan horse" in our IT industry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Bangalore - Every single park in bangalore has heavy american presence. trojans all of them, we should throw them out. maybe we can have our russian friends fill the gap.


Yes throw them out and be jobless for ever. Can you stick to defense related comments instead of making such moronic suggestions?

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 25 Nov 2013 09:30

Rs 25,000 cr tender for building helicopter-carrying warships

The Defence Ministry has issued a tender expected to be worth over Rs 25,000 crore for building warships which can carry helicopters.

"The tender for the Landing Platform Decks (LPDs) has been issued," Director General Acquisition SB Agnihotri said here at a FICCI interactive session with leaders of the defence industry.

He suggested that the tender was issued as part of efforts by the government to build the capabilities of the indigenous industry.

Agnihotri said he had institutionalised meetings with the industry captains at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis and expressed confidence that such interactions would continue even after his departure from the Ministry.

He has been promoted as Secretary to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.

The DG Acquisition said the Ministry was taking steps to sort out the problems faced by the industry and keeps updating the Defence Procurement Procedure in this regard.

Rs 25,000 cr tender for building helicopter-carrying warships | Business Standard

source: http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 124_1.html

see here for more details : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Role_Support_Vessel

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 25 Nov 2013 09:34

my support for Juan Carlos as possibility for light AC

Image

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spani ... Ferrol.jpg

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 25 Nov 2013 11:16

yes the carlos is in service and australia has signed up for 2 more. mistral is smaller. bigger the better even if used with helis only.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 25 Nov 2013 11:32

PratikDas wrote: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.


Well my example of Bisleri was an anecdotal example and it is actually a fact; now when it comes to big ticket items the number of parties who want to have their cut increases , this is a sad reality in India. The point is most significant contributors to inflation are dealers , middlemen, inside agents and obviously the neta-babu gang the OEM only marks up the price by so much. MoD inflates it to hide all the ghapla.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20453 » 25 Nov 2013 17:07

Juan Carlos is indeed the bst we can get, could be very useful in the future if IN looks at the F-35 as well.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 25 Nov 2013 17:36

underneath the hood though the juan carlos will need a big redesign to be capable as a proper JSF + ASW carrier because its hanger is only half the area of the flight deck and sited atop the storage decks for vehicles and the LST interior dock.

http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/i ... ais_lg.gif
they would have accomodation for a batallion of troops atleast in front part...you just cannot change acco to a hanger..though a hanger in emergency can have bunk beds to function as acco albeit not so comfortable.

the CVF has a constipated looking hanger too ... so looks like permanent deck parking on top is to be used
http://downloads.rkslstudios.info/RKSL/ ... ay_sml.jpg

I am afraid any LHD converted into a JSF carrier will offer a lot less sortie rate, units, munitions capacity because so much of it is optimized around the landing dock in the back .......

I am afraid if we want a carrier we need to build a carrier .... there is no cheap hack to get a attack carrier from a LHD. I would rather they function as sea control ASW ships to lead a flotilla of ASW FFGs and swarm the area with helicopters?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3435
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 25 Nov 2013 18:51

We need to settle upon the airborne component of these ships - heli, uav and fixed wing. If jsf is the only vtol fighter in the world then why wait .... why not start the eval process (which will take ten years anyways)

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2429
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 25 Nov 2013 22:31

Singha wrote:the APAR radar which is the closest analogue in size and look weigh around 2t per face. unless I am mistaken the aperture of the mf-star in pic above looks bigger than the APAR pic

http://img29.exs.cx/img29/5664/DeZeven_2jpg-2.jpg

IAI has it as 1.5 tons each it could thinner than APAR.

http://www.iai.co.il/Sip_Storage//FILES/3/27543.pdf

member_28131
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_28131 » 25 Nov 2013 22:39

tushar_m wrote:Rs 25,000 cr tender for building helicopter-carrying warships


He suggested that the tender was issued as part of efforts by the government to build the capabilities of the indigenous industry.



source: http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 124_1.html

see here for more details : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Role_Support_Vessel



Wouldn't this imply that they are looking to build these indigenously?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17023
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 25 Nov 2013 22:46

^^^ yes, but with a foreign partner with prior experience.

Aditya G wrote:We need to settle upon the airborne component of these ships - heli, uav and fixed wing. If jsf is the only vtol fighter in the world then why wait .... why not start the eval process (which will take ten years anyways)

why have a half-baked aircraft carrier that would eat into the amphib's helo wing ?

have the air cover from a full fledged carrier, leave the LHD to its thing.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Katare » 25 Nov 2013 23:18

Philip saar has been yearning for these flat-tops for a decade now!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20881
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2013 01:59

Oui! A few years ago I posted a comparison of the JC and Mistral classes of amphib vessels.The JC has an extra deck and is more versatile,the Spanish not possessing a genuine flat top like the CDG which the French operate.This class would be more suitable for our purposes as we have several island territories and security arrangements with littoral nations in the IOR like Mauritiius,etc.Even though by 2025 we should be operating three carriers,the Vikram,IAC-1 and IAC-2,at least 3 amphib vessels are required as they could be used for assisting ASW and lesser complex operations where limited air support is required.The USMC is going to operate its Harriers,including ex-RN aircraft until 2027! Our amphib vessels must have their own integral air support of troops,either in the form of STOVL fighters like the JSF/Harrier or/plus naval attack helos like the Russian KA-52 ,where a special version is being developed for Russian Mistral amphib vessels.Whether our LCH will see a naval version too developed remains to be seen.

(Russia’s Ka-52 Alligator Scout-Attack Helicopters
Oct 10, 2013 13:13 UTC by Defense Industry Daily staff
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/rus ... ers-05150/)

What is also required is an Indian Marine Corps to be raised which will initially consist of at least 3 divisions (50,000+ strong) .One must remember that we had around 80,000+ troops involved in that intervention.Given that event and the attempted coup in the Maldives,India cannot imagine that in the future such similar attempts will not occur.One must also go back to WW2 where the Japanese almost invaded India by sea and were knocking at the gates in the east in the Burma campaign.Our island territories are far closer to the ASEAN states than India and we know what happened to "fortress" Singapore,though impregnable.Similarly,the "Fortress Commander" of the A&N islands would do well to dwell on past history. A strong amphib aircraft component of the Fleet Air Arm is another requirement.It is simply incomprehensible how this vital asset has been neglected for aeons by Indian defence planners.Though a search is on now for a suitable aircraft with a Japanese amphib MRP aircraft the favourite because of political considerations,even a tiny minnow like the Maldives operates dozens of amphibs for civil/tourist purposes but which do a remarkable job of transportation and communications between the numerous islands of the nation.Using amphib aircraft along the Indian coastline would also serve civilian interests too,as many smaller ports and settlements located on our coastline do not have any proper air access,with some not even having rail links.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2743
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby JTull » 26 Nov 2013 02:02

Izumo will be better than Juan Carlos with same displacement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_ship_Juan_Carlos_I_(L61)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izumo-class_helicopter_destroyer

Seems govt. has earmarked 25,000 crores so atleast 3 Izumos will be possible at $1.2bln each. We've more to gain by cooperating with Japan than Spain which is a bankrupt nation with 27% unemployment. Japan has more to gain geo-politically as well. Their constitution will not prevent this cooperation as LPDs are essentially defensive platforms. Besides, our shipyards can benefit from the latest technology from Japan.

Irrespective of what Mistral might be capable of, I'd completely ignore it given large dependency on France already for Scorpenes and MMRCA.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srai » 26 Nov 2013 04:04

Philip wrote:...
What is also required is an Indian Marine Corps to be raised which will initially consist of at least 3 divisions (50,000+ strong) ...

Current plan has allocated only 10,000 troops, equivalent to around 2 or 3 brigades, for "Marine" warfare to be supported by 5-9 LSTs and 4 new LHDs.

We could multiply by 5 to get an rough estimate on how much support vessels a 50,000 strong force would require:
  • 20 LHDs = 4 new LHDs x 5
  • 25-45 LSTs = 5-9 LSTs x 5

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 Nov 2013 06:59

a big:small mix of 2 Izumo and 2 Dokdo ships would have been ideal but will not provide economy of scale.

Dokdo: 18300t full load, 200m x 31m, diesel plant, 23 knot max speed, 720 marines, 10 helis

Izumo is 10,000t bigger, 50m longer, 7m wider , 30 knots speed cogag plant, and can definitely work with JSF
the japan equivalent of the dokdo is the Oshumi class.

so a purely marine oriented small scale/peacekeeping/relief ops would be OShumi or Dokdo
a fast strike oriented warfighting platform would be Izumo or Juan carlos with JSF and a load of big ASW helicopters

we need to open our account with Japan - long overdue. Izumo2.0 for me. it looks every bit like a true carrier.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 Nov 2013 07:01

CG size comparison between the Izumo and its Hyuga class sister ship...in terms of a fast capable ship to lead a ASW TF, the Hyuga is a specialized ship for this role...replacing the Haruna/Shirane class which carried 3 helicopters something only the much bigger kirov class ever did.

Image

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 26 Nov 2013 07:09

JSF, the -B, need heat shielded decks. As a FYI.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20881
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2013 08:13

SRai,the entire MC need not be transported in amphibs.That would be unaffordable.Various platforms could be used as troop transports.The UK has its great STUFT concept."Ships taken up from trade",which was put to great use in the Falklands War.To achieve this,apart from a few dedicated troop transports,we need Ro-Ro vessels,which in normal times are used on both coastlines as ferries much in the way they are used all over Europe.Ro-Ro vessels in times of crisis would carry armoured and other assorted vehicles apart from troops. The QE2 cruise ship was also used as a troop transport.We have a regular service to the A&N islands from the mainland,which needs to be augmented especially for the increased defence and infrastructure needs being set up.The same for Lakshadweep.A regular Ro-Ro ferry service on the West coast from Gujarat,Bombay,Goa,to Kerala on the Malabar coast,with a similar one on the East coast would be hugely beneficial.A Cochin-Lakshadweep-Colombo-Maldives cruise service was shortlived,but a better planned ferry service to Colombo at least would be profitable.The max number of tourists visiting the island are from India and from the south.Being able to drive one's own vehicle around would attract many visitors.During Kargil there were some reports that some container ship/s had been pressed into service,perhaps for Harrier ops. as the Viraat was under refit.Theer are many innovative ways in which STUFT can be used to complement dedicated naval amphib vessels.However,the number of LSTs and LCTs must be enhanced.

The creation of an MC is very neccessary.Initially the force could come under the IA or IN until it is large enough and has the requisite establishment/HQ,training facilities and infrastructure on land ,while the maritime assets would come under naval control.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srai » 26 Nov 2013 09:38

^^^
True. Amphibs do not transport the entire 50,000+ troops. Given that LHDs IN is looking at carry around 500-800 troops (short/long duration) and LSTs less than 500 troops (short duration/limited range for tanks primarily), the marine crops you are proposing would still need substantial numbers of LHDs/LSTs to transport the first wave (at least 2 brigades worth for 3 divisions) along with additional supplies/equipment. Rest could be brought in with STUFT once a bridgehead has been established.

1 brigade worth -> (at the minimum) 4-5 x LHDs (w/ 500-800 troops capacity plus/minus vehicles) plus 5-8 x LSTs (w/ max 500 troops or 15 tanks/vehicles)

2 brigades worth -> (at the minimum) 8-10 x LHDs (w/ 500-800 troops capacity plus/minus vehicles) plus 10-15 x LSTs (w/ max 500 troops/15 tanks)

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3435
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 26 Nov 2013 12:29

IN had acquired some ships from Shipping Corporation of India - what is their status and current use?

Granted they are not fit for forced entry environment, but they should be handy in Op Jupiter and Op Sukoon type scenarios.


John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2429
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 27 Nov 2013 07:14

US-2 acquisition has been discussed for a while but this part irks me

India has reportedly clarified that it is reviewing the Special Chemicals, Organisms, Materials, Equipment and Technologies (SCOMET), thereby placing the Shinmaywa US-2i as a dual civilian-and-military item. India has accepted the high cost of the aircraft to build up the strategic partnership.

Leo.Davidson
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 09 Aug 2011 05:34
Location: Boston, USA

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Leo.Davidson » 27 Nov 2013 08:33

John wrote:US-2 acquisition has been discussed for a while but this part irks me

India has reportedly clarified that it is reviewing the Special Chemicals, Organisms, Materials, Equipment and Technologies (SCOMET), thereby placing the Shinmaywa US-2i as a dual civilian-and-military item. India has accepted the high cost of the aircraft to build up the strategic partnership.


I believe the SCOMET is because Japan is a non-aggressive post-WWII state, which is fine. I hardly doubt that the US-2 is an exclusive military machine. I believe it is more useful to the Coast Guard.

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23455 » 27 Nov 2013 09:14

Leo.Davidson wrote:
I believe the SCOMET is because Japan is a non-aggressive post-WWII state, which is fine. I hardly doubt that the US-2 is an exclusive military machine. I believe it is more useful to the Coast Guard.


Especially after 26/11 the Navy is the '"designated authority" on maritime security so the lines between the Coast Guard and Navy have blurred.

If some of the US-2s get kitted out with some of the really cool Israeli and Indian ELINT/SIGINT gear, that's a massive increase in military capability. Would expect nothing less from the IN, even though they may not confirm this in public.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3033
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby abhik » 27 Nov 2013 09:32

15 US-2is!? That's going to be a huge deal considering that these aircraft are similar sized to the C130 and likely more expensive.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest