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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20533
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Nov 2014 12:55

JTull wrote:Personally, I do not think DRDO should be allowed to meddle with badly needed resources. We shouldn't risk long down times because of experimental systems.


especially since they have nil exposure and knowledge on the AIP systems and will be just another bunch of govt employees hoping to learn on the job and then strike out to greener pastures.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 04 Nov 2014 16:28

Vietnam's range of operations is far smaller than that of the IN's.So a smaller corvette sized OPV would suffice,provided she can counter any 3-D threats esp. PLAN subs.The small sized sonar would be excellent if they could be used both by ASW helos and the planned ASW corvettes,meant to replace the Pauks.They use the same sonar on the Kamov ASW helos.If the sale of the OPVs to Vietnam are executed on time and at an affordable cost,there may be further orders from other friendly nations.SL is to also get OPVs.Integrating the Vietnamese ones with the IN's fleet would be ideal for cooperative engagement.In fact our OPV designs with increased sensor and armament could be a winner in its class in the global market as our costs would be far cheaper than western built vessels.The designs of the ND could be given to pvt. yards for construction who have the space and capacity,leaving our yards for more sophisticated warship and sub building for the IN.

Here's a detailed report on France's "jumbo-sized" Ocean class sub,displacing more than 4,000t,armed with an assortment of 34 weapons,smart scope/sensors like buoys,UAVs and UUVs,AIP with a blue-water patrol capability,etc.,etc.The cost is said to be half that of a Virginia class SSGN.However,the jury is still out whether it can replace a nuclear sub,but will look attractive for countries like Oz who have operational limitations for N-subs due to a lack of manpower skills.These subs will probably cost as much as an Indian built N-attack sub and may be a bit over the top.Our need is both caopability and numbers to meet the challenge of about 80-100 PLAN and Paki subs.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/is-thi ... 1652659060

Check into details of this superb Soviet era giant (hovercraft) landing craft,the Zubr class,which China is now going to build at home.The class can carry 3 MBTs plus upto 500 troops and comes with a variety of weapons for shore bombardment and self-defence.Also used by Greece,a NATO member.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/is-thi ... 1609439614

durairaaj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 82
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby durairaaj » 04 Nov 2014 17:23

At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 04 Nov 2014 17:30

JTull wrote:Personally, I do not think DRDO should be allowed to meddle with badly needed resources. We shouldn't risk long down times because of experimental systems.


Agree. White man needs our badly needed resources more than we do. Indigenous experimental systems are a bad idea. On the other hand a good idea is an imported experimental system funded with our money.

chetak wrote:especially since they have nil exposure and knowledge on the AIP systems and will be just another bunch of govt employees hoping to learn on the job and then strike out to greener pastures.


Yes, the government should stop those inefficient DRDO wallahs from quitting and spreading their inefficiency to private sector. They don't have experience or exposure to build the majority of weapon systems out there, hence we should continue to buy our systems exclusively from those who do.

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby sattili » 04 Nov 2014 17:58

durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.

Welcome to BRF, i don't think expressing your opinion will invite the wrath of other members. Since you are a researcher in this area, can you please explain the advantages and disadvantages of some these technologies?
A quick googling after reading your post reveals that PAFC has certain advantages:
Advantages:
The high operational temperature allows the efficient utilization of heat
Not sensitive to carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide
Long lifetime (phosphorous acid is low-volatile)
Stability
Simple construction

Disadvantages:
Large size
Requires platinum catalyst
Hard starting (phosphorous acid is solid under 40°C)

Areas of use
Energy supply of buildings
Power plants
Arms industry
Source: http://fuelcell.hu/index.php/en/fuel-cell-batteries/pafc
Do you think any of those characteristics like Efficient heat utilization, non sensitive to CO2 and stability could be factors that DRDO is pursing this path? My knowledge in this area is zero and appreciate your views on the topic.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 04 Nov 2014 18:01

durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.


Yes, the choice of PAFC over PEMFC was surprising, but then again, the Indian system is going to work with online hydrogen generation rather than hydrogen stored onboard for which PAFC would be more suitable than PEMFC.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3452
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 04 Nov 2014 18:05

durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.


what if the DRDO phosphoric acid fuel cells have better performance than the MESMA ?! The actual performance is classified., so might as well give them some benefit of doubt instead of generalizing !

VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby VikB » 04 Nov 2014 18:08

durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.


what are the other developed AIP using? the Li- ion failed miserably for automotive which is why dont see any mass produced Li-ion car
ps- once worked on electric car for an OEM :)

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3452
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 04 Nov 2014 18:13

VikB wrote:
durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.


what are the other developed AIP using? the Li- ion failed miserably for automotive which is why dont see any mass produced Li-ion car
ps- once worked on electric car for an OEM :)


http://www.defensenews.com/article/2014 ... Propulsion

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 04 Nov 2014 18:14

Durairaaj, what is your opinion of the famous siemens PEM fuel cells
http://www.industry.siemens.com/vertica ... fault.aspx

this product seems to be well proven now in U212 and U214 lines
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/analysis/a ... submarines

The benefits of the fuel cell propulsion system were reinforced earlier this year when the U32 set a new record for non-nuclear submarines by spending eighteen days in submerged transit without snorkelling. - See more at: http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/analysis/a ... 1bUIy.dpuf

Soryu is shifting to Li-ion batteries made by Yuasa.

VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby VikB » 04 Nov 2014 18:34

thats the whole point. it is far far difficult to use li-ion combine. it is that gilt edged tech that we simply dont have because it is rare even internationally. as such, it is best to go with PAFC which is doable rather than aim for the super duper tech.
some key issues in li-ion that the auto industry has struggled with
a) each battery is made of small cells (each is size of mother dairy milk pouch). each gets heated up. have to packed tightly leading to issue on cooling
b) each cell then loses its voltage at a different rate. the battery control unit has to dynamically adjust each output so that it can deliver a constant current/volt

durairaaj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 82
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby durairaaj » 04 Nov 2014 19:30

siemens PEM fuel cells: (Fuel efficiency 60%.) They use compressed hydrogen and oxygen (may be liquid) to run the fuelcells. US navy uses this in nuclear boats too. There the added advantage is under submerged condition they can reverse the fuel cell operation and electrolyze water to oxygen for breathing. Except for getting food for sailors the boat has no need to come out of water for 20 years.
(I applied for a job to do this research work at Siemens when they received the contract from US navy around 2006~08. my application was rejected for not being an USsie. Now I am in India not contributing anyway to further fuel cells research :).)

Li-ion Batteries (LIB): Hi power density, no moving parts, no gas emission and relatively high turn over el. efficiency (80%). Though energy density is relatively poor so for the given volume space in submarines LIBs are suitable only for 2 weeks. Beyond that one need fuel driven preferably diesel or H2 for fuel cells. I am sure Japs arrived at this time frame after doing optimization studies. Only compressed gas is Oxygen for breathing. no Hydrogen, no fuel tanks.
So this will be the quietest, but little bit expensive AIP. Only Japs know how to make LIB economically.
In cars their role is limited because of the cost increase does not match the performance gain over the Ni-MH batteries. So Toyato, Nissan etc switched over to Ni-MH batteries. Boeing accident was due to charging circuits.

Conventional PAFC: Dis adv: Low power density. It needs 10 times the size of PEMFC to give same power. Fuel efficiency 40% at the biggest optimum size. needs high Platinum loading. Phosphoric acid vapors coming out of the exits will corrode metals if not treated properly. Op. Temp 180~200oC. (search for UTC fuel cells. I dont know the name of the new owner)
Adv: can run for 65000+ hours.
Modern membrane PAFC:Op temp 120oC. power density increases But the durability is significantly reduced to 500 hours. plus all the above relevant disadvantages.

The main advantage of PAFC is they can run on diesel (DRDO might have chosen PAFC for this reason) by adding accessories which convert diesel to hydrogen and Carbon monoxide (CO) on board. CO acts as fuel at temp above 200oC. But these accessories will significantly increase the volume and hence not suitable for submarines.

Agility in drawing power LAB > LIB> PEMFC > PAFC.


Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3546
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Paul » 04 Nov 2014 20:32

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the ... 598?page=2

Since December 2008, China has regularly rotated naval task forces in the Indian Ocean, ostensibly for anti-piracy missions. Indian observers, however, have expressed concern over the second-order effects of such deployments, noting that they have allowed Chinese naval intelligence units to better survey the Indian Ocean’s underwater topography and record bathymetric conditions. Similarly, Beijing also signed a contract allowing it to explore polymetallic sulphide ore deposits over a 10,000 square-kilometer swath of the Southwest Indian Ocean’s seabed. This has been perceived by India’s Directorate of Naval Intelligence as an excuse for the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) to map the region’s notoriously challenging undersea terrain, with future submarine operations in mind.


Worth a read!

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20292 » 04 Nov 2014 20:43

VikB wrote:
durairaaj wrote:At the risk of reaping the wrath of fellow Rakshaks, I am posting this.
I hope the news of DRDO taking the burden of developing an AIP with Phosphric acid fuel cells (PAFC) for scorpene is not true. Because it is impractical to develop AIP for submarines (war fighting) based on PAFC. PAFC is not suitable for mobile application due to its low power density especially, when one include the accessories to make the fuel cells operational. It will occupy valuable space with in a submarine. PA Fuel cells are also less durable if organic membrane separator is used.
Li-ion batteries are the best and then comes the PEMFC. PAFC may be marginally better than the Lead Acid Batteries.
P.S: I am a researcher in fuel cells (+ PEMFC, PAFC, SOFC and electrolyzers) for 12 years.


what are the other developed AIP using? the Li- ion failed miserably for automotive which is why dont see any mass produced Li-ion car
ps- once worked on electric car for an OEM :)


may i reach you by email?

i'm from mat sci bkground ... iit

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Nov 2014 07:57


member_24684
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_24684 » 05 Nov 2014 08:18

.

So only S 70 b Left ..will the DAC clear the Deal .or play another round of RFI RFP game just like the 197 LUH Deal

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 05 Nov 2014 12:22

The IN has been waiting for so long that the 16 helos are sorely needed.What are the alternatives? What can Eurocopter offer? The US has heaps of them in service and can fast track a few for training purposes.AW has been shafted as it was too smart.It had the deal in its hands. The tail of the S-70s are lower though,one hopes it won't be too much of an operational problem on a pitching deck in rough weather.US warships are much larger and carriers/amphibs are far more stable than smaller frigates.
In retrospect,we should've embarked upon a medium sized naval ASW/multi-role helo a decade ago as there is so much of demand from all 3 services.This should've been the ideal follow on programme after the ALH building upon its success.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2014 14:58

afaik the S70 family have been operating off FFG sized ships for decades. japan must be having quite a few. not that its a ideal airframe design for naval use, but they have made it work both in land and air.

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 509
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 05 Nov 2014 17:00

Is the DRDO going to use Diesel fuel cracking for on-board production of hydrogen and oxygen? If they do, this is exactly what the Russians have announced they are creating for their Lada/Amur boats.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2014 19:38

since the russians tested a tea kettle onboard a Kilo and are now taking another route, one has to assume that route does not pan out. surely a nation that put 100 n-subs in the water over 30 years knows a thing or two about n-propulsion.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11309
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Nov 2014 22:26

This is big news, even 6 months ago everyone had written INS Sindhukirti as a write off and HSL F*** up, apprently the vessel is ready to launched back int he water and handed over to the navy in 5 months time.

Even Hudhud could not stop INS Sindhukirti refit at HSL

Wow- does that whaetver non upgraded Kilos can be upgraded at HSL while the scorpenes come online in a year or so. If Arihant can fire a K-4, INS Aridhanam is launched, INS chakra in the INS Vikram aditya battlegroup. Our submarine fleet could be heading to recovery pretty soon, I have we launch more Boomers after INS Arindham soon and some SSN construction is also secretly taking with the costs hidden in scorpenes and project 75 construction.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vaibhav.n » 05 Nov 2014 22:47

AFAIK, aren't S-70 their previous gen models? I thought the latest were the Romeo & Sierra variants. Then why are we then going for these hand me downs?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20533
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Nov 2014 23:01

Aditya_V wrote:This is big news, even 6 months ago everyone had written INS Sindhukirti as a write off and HSL F*** up, apprently the vessel is ready to launched back int he water and handed over to the navy in 5 months time.

Even Hudhud could not stop INS Sindhukirti refit at HSL


Wow- does that whaetver non upgraded Kilos can be upgraded at HSL while the scorpenes come online in a year or so. If Arihant can fire a K-4, INS Aridhanam is launched, INS chakra in the INS Vikram aditya battlegroup. Our submarine fleet could be heading to recovery pretty soon, I have we launch more Boomers after INS Arindham soon and some SSN construction is also secretly taking with the costs hidden in scorpenes and project 75 construction.


I made a post on this months ago on this thread. A chaiwalla from HSL had told me about this :)

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 05 Nov 2014 23:11

Is it just an refit or was anything added? AIP, VLS or other DRDO stuff. I hope DRDO is working on something like SOKS. May be wishful thinking.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Will » 05 Nov 2014 23:19

If it has really been patched up wldnt be surprised if it had been used as a training dummy to build skills for the Arihant.
Last edited by Will on 05 Nov 2014 23:54, edited 1 time in total.

Jaeger
BRFite
Posts: 319
Joined: 23 Jun 2004 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Jaeger » 05 Nov 2014 23:47

^^ in fact, given arihants bow form, sonar fit and of course the fact that we'd never built any kind of submarine ever before... And now suddenly all is hunky dory after the arihant is ready... Welllll there's a lot of dots there for someone to connect. IMVVHO.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Will » 05 Nov 2014 23:55

Either that or they used L&T's skills to repair it. But the former seems more likely.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Nov 2014 08:17

I think that after the SR disaster a decision wss made to fast track the SK refit.There are also enough Russian assistance if rewd.at hand.Kudos to those responsible if it arrives on time.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Nov 2014 08:24

my theory was it was used as a iron bird land rig to test subsystems meant for the N-sub program. once you decouple the propeller shaft from the gearbox, nothing stop you from running the complete sub on land either on diesel engine or batteries. you can even submerge beside the dock and operate the ballast tank if need be.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 06 Nov 2014 08:29

Singha wrote:my theory was it was used as a iron bird land rig to test subsystems meant for the N-sub program. once you decouple the propeller shaft from the gearbox, nothing stop you from running the complete sub on land either on diesel engine or batteries. you can even submerge beside the dock and operate the ballast tank if need be.


Same here. I too believe it was used as a guinea pig for Arihant.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1815
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srin » 06 Nov 2014 09:06

Singha wrote:my theory was it was used as a iron bird land rig to test subsystems meant for the N-sub program. once you decouple the propeller shaft from the gearbox, nothing stop you from running the complete sub on land either on diesel engine or batteries. you can even submerge beside the dock and operate the ballast tank if need be.


+1. You've provided the most sensible explanation of all.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11309
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 06 Nov 2014 09:29

Yup- what a contrast , when INS Sindhurakshak sank, everybody was saying RIP INS Sindhukirti and it will never sail again and how HSL does not anything etc.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Nov 2014 10:34

I think the beating up of HSL was a controlled IED by GOI, and then HSL getting back to work hard story, now finally they have turned the corner story....just smooth-fitting the curve from where it was kept to where it needs to be. perhaps its also designed to rehabilitate them as a potential builder of the P75I line too while mazgoan builds few more scorpenes.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3452
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kit » 06 Nov 2014 11:10

Singha wrote:my theory was it was used as a iron bird land rig to test subsystems meant for the N-sub program. once you decouple the propeller shaft from the gearbox, nothing stop you from running the complete sub on land either on diesel engine or batteries. you can even submerge beside the dock and operate the ballast tank if need be.



Thats probably what happened :twisted: ! As usual arm chair admirals got it all wrong :mrgreen:

Ganesh_S
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 09 Mar 2010 06:40
Location: united kingdom

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ganesh_S » 06 Nov 2014 12:51

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2014/09/d ... ul-to.html

Business Standard has compared the work that Russian “experts” at HSL ordered on the Sindhukirti, with that done on two submarines earlier -- INS Sindhughosh, refitted in Russia; and INS Sindhudhvaj, refitted in the Naval Dockyard, Visakhapatnam (see chart). In each work category, the Sindhukirti has required several times the work done on the Sindhughosh and Sindhudhvaj.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Nov 2014 13:09

thats one bizarre episode. maybe the russians just like the warm weather and clean beaches of vizag vs being in murmansk or vladivostok and dragged the project along.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12428
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby pankajs » 06 Nov 2014 13:38

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · 14h 14 hours ago

NMRL's AIP was kept in the classified domain.While the last 2 Scorpenes are certainly getting it, it is also being pushed for Project 75I.

VikB
BRFite
Posts: 340
Joined: 29 Jun 2009 10:02
Location: Mumbai/Delhi
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby VikB » 06 Nov 2014 14:39

I dont know if posted before https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM1IsiQAllM INDIAN NAVY WESTERN FLEET (FLING -2014)

From 7.07 to 7.17 shows perhaps the first landing on Vikramaditya by Indian pilot

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Nov 2014 15:37

Previous "offical" reports said that the IN was v.upset at the sub being dismantled and HSL unable to do the refit.There may have been a lot more refit work required than with the other subs sent to Russia in complete form.Much of the eqpt. too may have deteriorated during the last 7 years.It is taking Russia just 5+ years to deliver 6 new Kilos to Vietnam.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests