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.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby svinayak » 29 Jun 2014 02:39

kaizanin wrote:They've already tried. Took apart a perfectly good kilo and till date have not put it back together. Whether they learnt anything is anyone's guess.

Process of taking apart is learning!

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16339
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 29 Jun 2014 02:49

svinayak wrote:
kaizanin wrote:They've already tried. Took apart a perfectly good kilo and till date have not put it back together. Whether they learnt anything is anyone's guess.

Process of taking apart is learning!


Hmmm.....

Now I get it. That is what the MMS gov did.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 29 Jun 2014 09:27

Just a quick calculation for kilo class vs Next gen AIP subs

Price per unit is US$200–250 million .China paid approx. US$1.5-2 billion for 8 Project 636 Kilo class submarines (wiki)
consider cost increased from that point say approx 300-350 million ( :?: :?: :?: )

so for 3.5 billion we can get 10 kilo class subs (new & improved over earlier design) + they will start delivery after 3 years of contract (vietnam)

for 11-12 billion $$ we can get 11/3.5=31 new kilo class.


the only question in consideration is AIP , how important has AIP become for Submarines nowadays .
can a non AIP submarine be a good option for IN.

considering that for same amount six submarines are to be built + cost escalation + delivery date problem + new technology absorption problem + training problem + many more others


31/6 = 5(approx)
so for 1 AIP sub we can get 5 kilo class.

even if endurance of 1 AIP submarine is 3X of non AIP sub. we are still at profit.(also at AIP speed is limited & sub can't run from enemy subs)

kilo class has all the punch we need for Indian navy so attack capability is not in question + kilo class sub is feared by most strong navies due to its capability to disappear in thin air (water its a sub :) ).

+ Nirbhay(ver. 2.0) could be configured in future to be fired from Kilo class (no tech. knowledge just saying )


Views............. abt is there a possibility of swift decision by Mr PM to go for such a contract with Russia

Points to note
1. Navy needs Subs quick.
2. Cost could be decreased depending on units of purchase(31 is a lot).
3. Mr.Pm is not really a western guy.
4. Kilo has all the tech. & punch that IN needs.
5. slipping of delivery date is normal phenomena in Indian shipyards.
6. Tech. absorption will mean at least 5-6 years before we see our precious AIP sub(non scorpion)(again being polite).
7. if contract is signed now we can start getting subs from 2017 , for AIP Next gen sub we can't get before 2020 & by the time our SSN fleet might start to grow so long distance patrol could be handed over to them.(& non AIP low endurance can start to protect shores).

8. We don't have a concept of expeditionary force in last 1000 years we have not attacked any one & will not attack preemptively any country . our whole goal of Armed forces is based on defensive stands.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20021
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 29 Jun 2014 10:27

Yes Kilos in their latest avatar are superb boats,which come cheap and quick.Russia has an AIP fuel cell module,but is trying to develop improved batteries which will negate the need for any AIP system.The DRDO is also trying to develop an AIP system,but who knows when it will mature enough to be fitted onto a sub.A few Kilos will make up the shortfall in current numbers.The P-75I requirement can be pursued as it will take several years before any final decision can be made as to which boat is best from the contestants.

The only true AIP sub is a nuclear boat.We should start a parallel programme for building SSGNs along with the SSBN line,and acquire at least 2 extra Akulas from Russia.The IN requires at least 6-8 SSGNs to be able to counter the PLAN in the IOR and Indo-China Sea in a forward presence there.A 95 day patrol by an Akula/SSGN with a continuous presence by rotation operating from the east coast bases,plus conventional Kilos,etc.,operating with logistic help at Vietnamese bases,will give the IN an excellent deterrent right in China's backwaters.An intensive defence line of ASW assets,ships,aircraft SOSUS style seabed sensors,plus subs that can use the A&N island bases for logistic purposes,with a subtender based there,will be able to patrol and sanitise the key IOR chokepoints from the ASEAN waters.The news that the IN is extending the runway at Campbell Bay to 9000ft. which will then be able to operate a wide range of strike,logistic and LRMP aircraft is heartening news.In any crisis with China,we must be able to throttle the PLAN and Chinese merchant shipping from transiting through the IOR and Gulf.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3663
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 29 Jun 2014 17:33

New Kilos probly won't happen, the IN doesn't seem interested in Russian SSks anymore, otherwise we would have heard some noise by now. If Russian, they will push for an Akula or two if available. If they need SSKs fast, just get a few.more scorps directly from France. expensive, but armed forces like French /western stuff now and again.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 29 Jun 2014 19:31

akula cost of lease for 10 years was 670 million $$$ .

the Next Gen AIP sub cost 11.8/6= 2(approx) Billion $$$

It seems to be a good choice to go for more akula. Although the cost of operating SSN could be much higher than SSK, the capability & ability to remain on station for 3X period will cover for it .(If kilo is not good for IN)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20021
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 30 Jun 2014 07:23

The ultra high cost of the Scorpenes have already stung the IN badly.Just compare their capability with an Akula-simply no comparison,while the cost of one non-AIP sub is now is above $600M! The P-75I programme should be pursued,as it will fructify not earlier than 5 years from now,even if it accelerated.It should be the follow on programme to take over from the last Scorpene,which will arrive only by 2020+.In the interim however,to replace the two lost Kilos,and the Rakshak was a brand new upgrade,additional Kilos could be obtained swift and fast as we do need conventional subs for the littorals.For true blue water multi-ocean patrols there is nothing like a nuclear boat.at least 2 more Akulas will give us a credible SSGN capability against China,while we labour to perfect our own N-boats,SSBNs and SSGNs.Just like the German U-209 boats and their upgrades (212/214,etc.),where more than 50 have been built and are still being built,so too are the latest Kilo variants (636.3),but at much cheaper cost.The pic of the SRakshak lifted out of the water shows how tough her double hull is after the devastating explosions which sank the sub.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1152
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rkhanna » 01 Jul 2014 09:42

Tribunal order leaves Navy red-faced
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=21104


Extremely troubling. There is a disease plaguing the Armed Forces. Whether it is this news or the Whole Army Chief issue or the near mutiny that took place a few years ago.

It doesnt even matter if we are not getting the equipment or maintenance that is so badly needed if the ethos and professionalism cannot be maintained.

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

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 02 Jul 2014 16:44

The video of tug boats parking INS Shayadri for RIMPAC14 at Pearl Harbor --



Shiv also has posted some pics in his blog

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66599
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Jul 2014 16:48

unlike the ramshackle look of MDL and our mumbai naval docks, the pearl harbour dockside looks very neat indeed. no piles of debris and oil stains anywhere despite supporting the largest and highest duty cycle navy on earth.
similar neat and spacious look in their groton SSN base.
they know how to build durable military infra for sure.

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 321
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby parshuram » 02 Jul 2014 17:25

Sorry it is OT : just curiously is PN or PLAN are also part of this excercise ?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby brar_w » 02 Jul 2014 17:29

Yes thy are

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23361
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 02 Jul 2014 17:36

Singha wrote:unlike the ramshackle look of MDL and our mumbai naval docks, the pearl harbour dockside looks very neat indeed. no piles of debris and oil stains anywhere despite supporting the


I have been to places at Mumbai where our IN Ships are docked be it Frigate or Aircraft Carrier and they are quite neat and well maintined , yes you can see some oil stains in the water but thats with any ships docked any where in the world.

The MDL pic we saw might be cluttered as they would be refitting the new ships out there so equipment lying around , granted they should be more disciplined how things are around.

But dont confuse the MDL docking space with Navy Operational Ship docking space , the Pearl Harbour is more like Navy Operational Ship berthing space

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 321
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby parshuram » 02 Jul 2014 17:47

brar_w wrote:Yes thy are

Thanks, so are n't we giving a perfect snooping chance to them esp chinese who thrive for opportunity like this

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby brar_w » 02 Jul 2014 17:56

parshuram wrote:
brar_w wrote:Yes thy are

Thanks, so are n't we giving a perfect snooping chance to them esp chinese who thrive for opportunity like this


Snooping works both ways, every nation seeks to get to "know" the other while they all participate fully knowing this and taking all precautionary measures to safeguard their protected capability. That navies from all over the world look forward to taking part in bi-lateral and multi national exercises goes to show how valuable things like RIMPAC and Red flag (air force) are for understanding how the rest of the world fights and cooperating with each other to better tackle threats and become better.

Here's more if you wish to follow whats going on more closely

http://www.cpf.navy.mil/rimpac/2014/participants/

titash
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby titash » 02 Jul 2014 20:33

Interesting to compare the size/height of Shivalik with the Arleigh Burke in that video. Considering that our 3 Shivaliks are among our largest surface combatants, and the USN is looking to operate ~ 90 Arleigh Burkes...gives you an idea of the size and capability of the USN

The mast is significantly taller and the 4 faced Aegis is mounted quite high when compared with other ships; it's hard to get a proper perspective when looking at the Arleigh Burke in isolation and/or with a Tico

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66599
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Jul 2014 21:18

burke looks smaller when in isolation and its two big funnels make the ship look small. but its a massive ship. burke and daring class are significantly broader than our ships which opens a lot of space in the foredeck for missile complex. plus we lose a lot of area to the brahmos + rbu in all ships.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66599
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Jul 2014 21:21

the buildings could do with some demolition, cleanup and fresh coat of paint. reminds me of the old soviet era buildings in iit mumbai campus in mid 90s.
http://www.stratpost.com/wp-content/upl ... -x-301.jpg

pic of the main SSN base on us east coast in groton. capacity seems like around 20+ subs if two tie up on each pier.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... sfsite.jpg

stopgaps like tying up subs side by side, and ships too is not entertained as they have built the purposeful infra.
hopefully being last among the major powers in the N-sub table we are doing the good stuff in karwar etc.

that pen in the middle of the line with walls is probably a degaussing facility. or floating dock to raise the sub and cart it to the OEM shipyard nearby.

Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ankit Desai » 03 Jul 2014 01:37

+1 Singha sir,

Every time I look MDL, GRSE,Vishakhapatnam or Kochin ship yard on google map, you see that there are lot of space they can clean up and or demolish to use as ship building space or jetty as you said.

Just cleaning up can free large space to build new one or two ship building shades and jetties.

I wonder what do they consider when they say modernization of ship yards ? Looks like to build only shades and cranes consider as modernization !

-Ankit

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3887
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby deejay » 03 Jul 2014 11:04

Singha Ji, Ankit Ji, getting work done at our ports is a nightmare. I have little personal experience, but the Unions and the Mafia at all ports are causing major headaches, with a lot of good people opting out of ports regularly. The problem in its intensity is same on the east coast and west coast.

I cannot confirm this but even with all problems Mumbai port is the most efficient in India in terms of getting job done.

The clean up of ports will have to focus beyond structural changes. A friend of mine (retired IA offr) working with the Tata's, now posted at an eastern port, says they are barely able to achieve 30% efficiency. Any change is very strongly resisted.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16339
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Jul 2014 06:43

Pentagon notifies US Congress of proposed sale of Harpoon missile to India

The Pentagon has notified the US Congress about its decision to sell anti-ship Harpoon missiles to India at an estimated cost of $200 million arguing that it will strengthen India-US strategic relationship and improve security of an important partner. The entire package under the foreign military sale route includes a dozen odd UGM-84L Harpoon Block II Encapsulated Missiles, 10 UTM-84L Harpoon Encapsulated Training missiles, and two Encapsulated Harpoon certification training vehicles, the Department of Defense's, Defence Security Cooperation Agency said.

"The estimated cost is $200 million," it said adding that the Harpoon missile system will be employed on the Indian Navy's Shishumar class submarine and will provide enhanced capabilities in defence of critical sea lines of communication.

India has already purchased Harpoon missiles for integration on Indian Air Force Jaguar aircraft and Indian Navy P-8I maritime patrol aircraft. India will have no difficulty absorbing these additional missiles into its armed forces, it said in its notification to the Congress

"This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to strengthen the US-India strategic relationship and to improve the security of an important partner which continues to be an important force for political stability, peace, and economic progress in South Asia," the Pentagon said, adding that the this proposed sale of Harpoon missiles will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

Boeing would be manufacturing this Harpoon missile. "In accordance with the Indian Defence Procurement Policy, a contractor may be expected to conclude offset agreements with the Government of India but no offset agreement is currently known to have been proposed in connection with this potential sale," it said.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66599
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Jul 2014 08:31

RIMPAC has its own facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/RimofthePacific

drool slurp look at the mass of immaculate docks and workshops.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =1&theater
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 5466_n.jpg

the infra in pearl harbour resembles the airside of a posh airport, not a grubby dockyard...when one is servicing billion$ ships..the land infra needs to of same class....a lesson we often forget in the rush just to lay in assets....a BMW needs proper munna garage, not street parking.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Boreas » 05 Jul 2014 12:32

anybody knows the exact number of harpoons navy is going to get for $200 million. What I get from newspaper reports is it is more than 24 (two dozen). It have to be a lot more than that! Harpoon costs 1.5mil a piece.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16339
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Jul 2014 13:13

Unable to paste link ........ On my "smartphone".


The Government of India has requested a possible sale of 12 UGM-84L Harpoon Block II Encapsulated Missiles, 10 UTM-84L Harpoon Encapsulated Training missiles, 2 Encapsulated Harpoon certification training vehicles, containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $200 million.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Boreas » 05 Jul 2014 16:56

but those figures don't add up! are they charging 12-15million per missile?

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arun » 07 Jul 2014 17:52

Boreas wrote:anybody knows the exact number of harpoons navy is going to get for $200 million. What I get from newspaper reports is it is more than 24 (two dozen). It have to be a lot more than that! Harpoon costs 1.5mil a piece.


Boreas wrote:but those figures don't add up! are they charging 12-15million per missile?


Looks like India is once again being gypped by the US.

The US is supplying 65 Tomahawk Cruise Missiles to the UK at USD 140 Million. Deal was notified on the same day as India’s Harpoon deal.

Strange. Long ranged nuclear capable submarine launched sub-sonic cruise missile with a land attack capability package for UK is working out to a whole lot cheaper than India’s Harpoon deal which involves purchase of a lot fewer non-nuclear capable medium ranged sub-sonic submarine launched with some land attack / littoral capability Harpoon Missiles.:

United Kingdom – Tomahawk Block IV Torpedo Launched Land-Attack Missiles

India – UGM-84L Harpoon Missiles

Earlier Harpoon missile sale to India (For P8I / Jaguar) had similar issue of price gouging by US. Then it was reported that Harpoon missiles sold to India were nearly triple the price of those sold to Pakistan:

Harpoons: India to pay US almost three times more than Pak

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby brar_w » 07 Jul 2014 17:55

All FMS deals involve elements that are much more then simply buying the missile. A breakup at the time of the deal should be online to look up. The missile itself costs the same for every nation, and other elements of the FMS deal vary from buyer to buyer depending upon what is expected from the deal.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20021
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 09 Jul 2014 07:35

Yeah,tell that to the laughing Pakis who get 3 Harpoons for the price of every one sold to India! But then if you want such perks,you must allow yourself to be used as a "rent-boy",something thankfully we cannot do especially under the new dispensation!
Remember also that a former CNS criticised the FMS route saying that everything was heavily loaded in favour of the seller.

Oz and Japan appear on the verge of signing on for the acquisition and manufacture of its Soryu class large 4,000t+ AIP subs.If concluded,it would mark a significant about turn in Japan's pacifist strategic policy,plus bringing in a new contestant into the booming conventional sub market.Unable to build/buy nuclear boats,Japan has had to enlarge the size of its conventional subs for blue water duties,unlike most medium sized nations/navies which prefer smaller stealthy AIP subs for the littorals.hence the size of German,French and Swedish designs.Russia's Kilo class at just under 3000t (due to its double-hull,strength seen in the recovered SRakshak) could be included.

The IN's search for a P-75I design has languished for almost two decades,since Adm.Bhagwat was CNS.The Soryu is one option but at what price? One is also not sure whether Japan has also been included in the RFP. From its size,the cost of such a sub would certainly be in the $1B+ region,which beggars the Q whether the IN would be better off with an SSSGN variant of the basic ATV/Arihant design.A 10yr lease of an Akula is also only $1B with options to buy the sub at depreciated cost after 10 yrs.Some defence analysts say that the IN is barking up the wrong tree in its P-75I requirements and search,as to counter the PLANs huge sub fleet including N-boats,the best way forward for the In is to acquire asap at least 6-8 SSGNs apart from the 5 planned SSBNs.

The GOI needs to most urgently take a decision for an interim solution to the IN's sub crisis,immediately add a few more subs to arrest the fall in numbers of operational subs,accelerate the N-boats being built at home,acquire at least 2 more Akulas and finalise the parameters for the 75-I which will only appear around 2025 judging by current yardsticks.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/australi ... mat+RSS%29
Australia and Japan to Ink Submarine Deal

Prime Ministers Shinzo Abe and Tony Abbott will sign an agreement to open up cooperation on producing submarines.
By Zachary Keck
July 08, 2014

As Clint noted earlier today, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is making the rounds throughout Oceania this week.

Abe’s stopover in Australia is expected to be particularly significant for many reasons that Clint discussed. However, the security aspects of the Abe’s Australia visit deserve special attention.

In particular, on Tuesday Abe and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott are expected to sign an agreement that will allow the two countries to cooperate on the production of submarines. According to Australian news sources, under the agreement “Japanese-designed submarines could be built under license in Adelaide or even straight off the shelf from Japan.”

As The Diplomat has covered for some time, Australia has long been exploring the best options for its next generation submarines. After ruling out a nuclear-powered submarine, in May 2012 the then-Labor Party government announced four possible options:

An existing off-the-shelf foreign design.
A modified off-the-shelf foreign design
An evolved Collins-class design
Development of a completely new submarine design in Australia

Last year, however, in a move that saw widespread criticism, the Australian government ruled out the first two options.

The fact that the Abbott government is now exploring cooperation with Japan therefore represents a change in policy.

There were signs that this was coming. Most notably, during a trip to Japan last month, Australian Defense Minister David Johnston became the first non-Japanese minister to tour one of the Maritime Self-Defense Forces (MSDF) stealthy, diesel powered Soryu-class submarines.

“Australia is looking to strengthen our defense cooperation with Japan by examining ways to enhance our cooperation in the field of defense science and technology,” a spokesperson for Defense Minister Johnston said at the time. Johnston himself reportedly called the Soryu-class submarines the best conventional submarines in the world.

At the same time, noting Australia’s engagement with the U.S. and European countries on submarine technology, Johnston noted, “We are casting a wide net to get the best chance of acquiring a really decent submarine for Australia that will last for decades.”

Still, the Soryu-class subs offer many advantages to Australia. At 84 meters and 4,200 tons (submerged), they are the largest non-nuclear conventional submarines in the world.
They are also equipped with a unique Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system that allows them to stay submerged indefinitely, according to Australian news reports. This would be advantageous to a country like Australia that has a wide area of sea to cover.

The agreement to be signed this week will focus on marine hydrodynamics with the possibility of that joint venture leading to a more substantial agreement. Australia has pledged to spend A$40 billion ($37 billion) to replace its current fleet of Collins-class submarines. A final decision on what type of submarine to pursue is expected to be made early next year.


Here is another report on China's N-sub ambitions.
China's Submarine Ambitions Project Global Intent
Posted 07/07/2014

Sailors line up on a Chinese nuclear submarine at the Qingdao submarine base in China's Shandong province on Oct. 27, 2013.AP View Enlarged Image

Geopolitics: In a clear signal of military ambitions that go well beyond guarding its coast, China has floated plans to build nuclear-powered attack submarines. The Obama Defense Department seems clueless.

Our antennae went up after a weekend report from the Washington Times' Bill Gertz describing how China released what appeared to be a mock-up of its next-generation nuclear-powered attack sub at its Qingdao submarine academy.


The news came from an article in a specialized journal by analyst Rick Fisher. "The role of this model may simply be to inspire the academy's students," Fisher says. "But it may signify a larger personnel investment by the (People's Liberation Army Navy) to prepare for its next-generation submarines, as it may also offer some indication about a new class of (nuclear attack submarines)."

Given what's known about China's military buildup, Fisher's analysis is plausible. China now spends $145 billion a year on defense, having added 9.4% annually since 2004, according to Pentagon estimates. By comparison, President Obama is requesting $575 billion in 2015, down from $708 billion when he took office.

"Of particular note is (China's) feverish acquisition of submarines," writes Stratfor analyst Robert D. Kaplan in his invaluable 2014 book "Asia's Cauldron." He quotes Singaporean military expert Bernard Loo Fook Weng as saying "submarines are the new bling, everybody wants them."

China is slated to build or acquire 75 subs, one more than the current U.S. fleet. Each costs $1 billion, not including the expense of training and maintenance. But that doesn't seem to faze China's leaders.


Submarines fascinate them, Kaplan says, because they "are about sheer aggression." They also create an atmosphere of uncertainty — a Chinese military forte comparable to America's "shock and awe."

Until now, China has focused on quiet diesel-powered subs as a means of thwarting U.S. naval ships in the South China Sea. But such a purported role itself is suspect, given that the U.S. has been the guarantor of peace in the area since the end of World War II.

The new nuclear model, which can remain at sea for long stretches, suggests that China has ambitions far greater than regional. In fact, it may signal that China already believes it has chased the U.S. out of the region and is moving on to global projection of power.

Does the U.S. have a strategy to checkmate this dream of high seas dominance? If so, we have yet to see any evidence of it.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorial ... z36w3LWaP9

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Viv S » 09 Jul 2014 08:15

From Brazil -

US Clears Harpoon Missile Sale to Brazil

WASHINGTON — The US government cleared a $169 million sale of Boeing AGM-84L Harpoon missiles to Brazil, the Pentagon agency that coordinates foreign weapon sales said Tuesday.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) notified Congress on May 6 that the State Department approved the sale.

Brazil requested 16 AGM-84L Harpoon Block II Missiles, four CATM-84L Harpoon Block II Captive Air Training Missiles, spares, training, logistics and support equipment, according to the DSCA notice.

________________


This is again the max value of the contract, what they actually sign might be much lower.

hanumadu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4398
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby hanumadu » 09 Jul 2014 09:12

Centre set to approve Rs 19,000 crore for INS Vikrant

All the requisite funding in one go. Was there any indigenous project that got this kind of funding under UPA?

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2244
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 09 Jul 2014 10:16

Phillip: looks like China is going maximalist. Pakis are going maximalist with nuke production. We seem to be content with "minimum credible blah blah with unproven TN bum"

member_27164
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_27164 » 09 Jul 2014 10:38

Of particular note is (China's) feverish acquisition of submarines," writes Stratfor analyst Robert D. Kaplan in his invaluable 2014 book "Asia's Cauldron." He quotes Singaporean military expert Bernard Loo Fook Weng as saying "submarines are the new bling, everybody wants them."


if above is true, i would say it is similar to kids. when neighbor's kid gets new toy of current trend, your kid also starts crying for the same. When his wish is fulfilled or he gets other toy he starts bragging my toy is bigger/better/shinier.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11034
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 09 Jul 2014 10:39

hanumadu wrote:Centre set to approve Rs 19,000 crore for INS Vikrant

All the requisite funding in one go. Was there any indigenous project that got this kind of funding under UPA?


The question is why was UPA twiddling its thumb and stalling, can't think of decesion except C-17, C-130 and T-90 which they did not stall and grind to a halt.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23361
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 09 Jul 2014 20:57

RIMPAC 2014: Indian Navy puts stealth frigate through paces at RIMPAC debut
The Indian Navy is showcasing the Shivalik (Project 17)-class guided-missile frigate INS Sahyadri in its debut at this year's US-hosted 'Rim of the Pacific' ('RIMPAC') maritime exercises.

The vessel is participating in maritime drills, including live-firing exercises, alongside navies from 22 other nations in and around Hawaii from 26 June to 1 August. India previously took part as an observer at the exercises.

Speaking to IHS Jane's on 5 July during a visit to the frigate, Sahyadri 's executive officer Lieutenant Commander Prasanna K Madhyastha said the Indian Navy was participating to gain experience operating in a large multinational setting. "It is an opportunity to learn and improve interoperability with vessels from other navies. Knowledge and expertise gathered, especially from systems used during 'RIMPAC', is going to benefit the Indian Navy," he said.

Lt Cdr Madhyastha said the US Navy (USN) had helped to install terminals that could enable access the USN's Combined Enterprise Regional Information Exchange System (CENTRIXS) on the vessel for the duration of the exercise. This allows Sahyadri to communicate securely with vessels from participating navies. CENTRIXS is a command-and-control network that permits the sharing of messages and images used by the USN. The terminals will be returned to the USN at the end of the exercise.

"Besides learning and gaining capabilities with information systems such as CENTRIXS, we are also keen on learning NATO-compliant procedures and codes when it comes to operating naval vessels," said Lt Cdr Madhyastha.

The 6,200-tonne Sahyadri features a reduced radar cross-section and infrared signature. The vessel was commissioned in July 2012 and has been positioned for the Indian Navy as a "multi-purpose command-and-control platform capable of operating in a network-centric multi-threat environment". The frigate is the third vessel in the class alongside sister ships Shivalik and Satpura , commissioned in April 2010 and August 2011 respectively.

The missile frigate is equipped with two AK-630 guns that act as the ship's close-in weapon system, one Oto Melara 76 mm main gun, and 32 vertical launch system cells that can fire anti-ship missiles.

Lt Cdr Madhyastha told IHS Jane's that the frigate is armed with SS-N-27 Novator Alfa Klub-N surface-to-surface missiles for the exercises. However, the projectiles will not be fired. "As this is our first time participating, we will only put the 76 mm gun to test at ground and floating targets provided by the US Navy for now. It is a good opportunity to test our accuracy and capability at operating this gun in a collaborative environment with other ships," he said.

Lt Cdr Madhyastha did not dismiss the possibility of firing other armaments at future 'RIMPAC' activities, but conceded that this will depend on the Indian Navy's requirements and aims at the exercises.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16339
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 09 Jul 2014 22:16

hanumadu wrote:Centre set to approve Rs 19,000 crore for INS Vikrant

All the requisite funding in one go. Was there any indigenous project that got this kind of funding under UPA?


There is also an over 60,000-tonne IAC-II in the planning stage, which may have nuclear propulsion ......................

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3537
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Paul » 10 Jul 2014 03:05

CCS approval should not mean all the money has allocated to the project. It means the Finance minister does not have to go to the CCS for the next phase of approval. Now it is between the Defence and Finance ministries.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1983
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Picklu » 10 Jul 2014 04:07

^^ ju mean right and left hand of Jet Li.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23361
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Jul 2014 16:54

Came across this brochure in SenGupta blog on Brahmos

Amur with Brahmos : http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iKoKjs1Gzbk/U ... hMos-1.jpg

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23361
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Jul 2014 17:00

In Amur design it seems you loose 50 Miles of Underwater Range and 200 miles of Snorkling Range and 1 kt in speed as a Trade off for 8 VLS Brahmos , Not bad considering 8 VLS Brahmos or Nirbhai offer tremendous firepower.

If you can add DRDO Fuel Cell AIP to Amur then you can get much higher submerged range.

member_28526
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 25
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_28526 » 10 Jul 2014 17:25

What about the Li-Ion batteries? Like the type being developed in South Korea? Supposed to have twice the density of lead acid batteries thereby giving greater range and quieter ops.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests