Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

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.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 22 Apr 2017 03:07

Truly shocking half thought arguments.

An aircraft carrier is not just the ship itself. The air component of the carrier is what defines it. Secondly, the aircraft carrier will not move alone and has ships in the task force which all complement it. The aircraft carrier in the Indian Navy context execute the following tasks which no submarine can;

- Provide protectice air bubble to own fleet from enemy air force or naval aviation
Can submarine do it. Nope.

- Hunt and destroy maritime strike aircraft including enemy's ASW helicopters.
Consensus on the forum is helicopter is the best weapon against a submarine - then surely you need to kill the enemy helicopters to protect your own fleet? How are you proposing to do it?

- Attack ships and land targets over a large area using variety of weaponry at long distances for number of days
Could be anything from dumb bombs, LGBs to cruise missiles. SSNs on the other hand are consigned to use only cruise missiles. So you are confined to use it only for certain applications. Maybe a picture will remind us of the awesome power our fleet has even today:

Image

- hunt and prosecute submarines in large swathes of the ocean with ASW choppers
how else would you get choppers in the middle of IOR?

- execute amphib operations
thanks to LCVPs, choppers and large internal space. Operation Jupiter brings memories? Viraat was a "commando carrier"

- Act as fleet command ship
Though destroyers and fleet ships can do that.

The ability to project power comes from these abilities. If an aircraft carrier cannot stop pakis from exporting terror than neither can a submarine.

Philip wrote:Morover,the carrier can be in only one placae at a time whereas the 12 subs could be in sev.maritime regions armed with BMos-L ,etc.


Karthik S wrote:^^^ to whom you are going to say 'don't mess with us' after flashing CVN, Pak or China? We don't need CVN for both. Or you think having a CVN will stop pakis from exporting terror or china from messing with us the way they are now? In which other scenario will it come handy if 'don't mess with us' theory doesn't work?


abhik wrote:BTW exactly where and against whom do people think we will be projecting power with a half american ship and french/american/russian aircraft?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 22 Apr 2017 03:55

A lot of people simply assume that a carrier has no utility in the Indo-Pak naval theatre. Further, we are simply no match for the chinese fleet and hence no point in having a carrier at all.

Pakistan Navy's strategy will be to create a safe zone close to their coastline to provide for security to their ports and ships. IN's objective will be to penetrate it by killing PN's ships and destroying their defences. This will be done by the surface navy sailing for the Paki coastline at different points. Both PN and PAF can challenge them as they will have 'home advantage'.

The Vikramaditya's captain claimed that he can provide a 250Km radius protective bubble around himself. I have juxtaposed the same against PN's cordon. Once can clearly see that Gwadar, Pasni, Ormara, Karachi will all be 'bottled up' by the carrier task force place in the northern Arabian Sea. When this happens prior to start of hostilities, it will have to weigh in on their planner's mind - hence power projection value of the carrier.

The carrier can also in this position counter any offensive moves by PN P-3s and PAF Mirages who will be looking to break out and attack Bombay High and Trombay.

Image

Caveat: this is an amateur's analysis. Both IN and PN have better qualified people to decide what they have to do in war!

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1227
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby sudeepj » 22 Apr 2017 06:32

How big is a submarines sensor-shooter bubble? 50kms at most? Compare with a carrier or even a twin helicopter equipped frigate. It can see, hit, hunt farther. A submarine has a place in a modern navy, a very specific place, but it can not win a naval war by itself.

'Stealth, firepower, speed, range of fire, network centricity': If these five elements define a naval combatant, a submarine is limited in all but one, albeit its superlative in that one element. SSK costs are not as low as some will have you believe, our scorpenes cost nearly a billion dollars each! While the VikAd cost about three. Ask any naval chief if he would rather have three scorpenes vs a VikAd and the answer will always be VikAd.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 07:29

Russia is sailing a typhoon sub on surface in the baltics...with 24 slbms for all to note.

Thats raw power. Esp with uvls tubes packing 100s of kalibers and zircons. Even the much smaller yasen packs 32 or 48 depending on whom one asks and 40 heavy torpedos or more missiles.

Thats style and raw power

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Manish_Sharma » 22 Apr 2017 09:25

Aditya G wrote:Truly shocking half thought arguments.


Our budget is anyway low compared to others for armed forces.

Out of Army - AF - Navy ;

Navy gets least.

Now MMRCA Rafale were canceled asthere is no money.

Then where the money will come from for 55 a/c and 65000 ton aircraft carrier. Due to salty sea air maintenance will be expensive too.

Airbase strip maintenance will be less much less than carrier.

Just like vik and 29Ks are mostly in news due to wrong reasons.

Soviets were not idiots to counter nato with ssn and ssk fleets in huge numbers.

P28s can hunt subs and so can helicopters from Vikrant no need for Vishal.

Did our carrier go to Karachi in '71?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Apr 2017 09:57

It's not about having or not having carriers.... what will the third carrier be... Another vikrant or a big cvn....that sirs, is the question.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4155
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 22 Apr 2017 10:18

Aditya G wrote:Truly shocking half thought arguments.


Kindly first think about the bigger picture everyone is talking about. Nobody said Aircraft Carriers are ineffective, or SSNs are more effective than CVNs. Personally, I'd love to see our own CATOBAR CVN supercarrier with Rafales on the deck.

Point is, given our defense budget, a CVN with all its aircraft and choppers will cost as much as the total budget allocated for purchases for an entire year. Let our GDP grow a trillion or 2 before we can think about CVN as our allocation to defense will be more (and I really hope we spend 2.5% to 3% of GDP on defense then). Also, there is no point having just 1 CVN, we need to have atleast 2, so that 1 is available at any given time, while the other is under maintenance or repair etc. So you can see the amount of investment needed.

Coming to the scenarios, the distance from Rann of Kutch to paki Irani border on the Arabian sea is little more than 700 km. We can easily make do with LR Brahmos, MKIs, Nirbhays, at the present moment our navy is 7 times bigger than theirs. I can only see this number increasing in the future.

Regarding China, are you going to bomb the hell out of Chinese cities using 2 squadrons of Rafales or F-18, for that you first need to get your carriers close enough to do that, and how many such waves of attack you think is possible? So land attack using carrier jets will not be much effective.
Regarding attacking other ships in ocean, you can easily do so using LRMP such as backfires, blackjacks, these are required in our scenario. BTW, we explored possible routes of chinese warships in one of the threads, you can look up. With our cruise missiles in A&N, it's very difficult for them to enter BoB through malacca, and they don't have many spots for refueling as well.

Point is, given our budget, threat assessment, it will be prudent to go for 8 10 SSNs rather than a single CVN. These many SSNs can provide far bigger security grid than a single CVN.
Last edited by Karthik S on 22 Apr 2017 10:51, edited 1 time in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 10:28

1 more vikrant ...3b
2 hyuga .... 4b
12 p28 asw ships .... 5b
More mrmp and lrmp ... xb
Sosus belt .. 1b
12 tu160 for tibet/naval strike .... 6b
90 naval helis .... 7b

12 ssn incl 3 arihants so 9 of new class ... 9b
4 ssbn ... 6b
6 more scorpenes to offset kilo retirements ... get costs down to 0.4b ....3b

Total 50b capex over next 15 years
3b capex per annum

Additional capex fr tankers supply ships weapons ddg ffg will be another 3b per annum

We need 6b on navy capex per annum to compete like 40.000cr

These are urgent needs not a wannabe nimitz without the use case

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 10:29

Thats a balanced fleet vs 5 of nimitz class for same cost.
No huge air wing to keep paying uncle for on opex

It will both take down the sub threat and tear apart any surface fleet

For peacetime flag showing 2 vikrant 2 hyuga 4 new lpd more than enough

Blackjacks can buzz the liaoning at low level like fencers did to uss ross in black sea x3

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 10:45

Iaf will want prestige of the blackjacks. Let it be special sac joint squadron staffed by both in and iaf on deputation and funded from sac budget

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Bheeshma » 22 Apr 2017 10:53

Blackjacks are never going to serve in IN or IAF. Lets get real, Russia doesn't have enough for themselves. I will settle for 16 P-8I's and 24 MRMP's based on C-295's. Hopefully they can be jury rigged to carry Brahmos-M and A's. Heck IN didn't even want Tu-22M3's.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 22 Apr 2017 11:05

With respect this thread has stopped being analytical about threats and responses and has become like this toddler saying "I want this. I want that"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t7zbw1Xao4

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 11:30

Bheeshma wrote:Blackjacks are never going to serve in IN or IAF. Lets get real, Russia doesn't have enough for themselves. I will settle for 16 P-8I's and 24 MRMP's based on C-295's. Hopefully they can be jury rigged to carry Brahmos-M and A's. Heck IN didn't even want Tu-22M3's.


IN doesnt want the backfires because they are long out of production and only russia has the boneyard stock to keep them around. same for the bears and mays.

the blackjacks are a different tale. russia has 16 now. some came from ukraine. rest were gleefully destroyed in ukraine under some nunn-lugar act, a sight that infuriated deeply the russian military class.

well now they are starting NEW production of a mk2 from 2020 onward...1st delivery in 2022. given the cost and complexity it wont be a more than 50 and rate is only going to be around 3 per annum. this is where we can get in and fund the line for additional 2 per annum to build up a stock of 12. we better get our shoe in the door now or miss out.

http://tass.com/defense/940606

in addition due to cost they have dropped plans for IL96 AAR to better support the bomber regiments. it will be midas with ps90a engines only

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... air-tanker

our delivery timeline would 2 per annum between 2022 to 2027 and then more if we need. initially just 1 squadron with 12 a/c. with a 50% availability rate of these heavies, we would be able to put up 6 a/c on a random day....and it will have a decades of future in RUAF so no issue with parts pipeline.

the P8I has a bomb bay so called barely enough for a couple of torpedos and carries harpoon ASMs in tandem inline pylons outside. it was never designed as a bomber and never will be. MRMP even more so. what is jury rigging 1 x brahmosM going to achieve than waste time.

there is a reason why the B1/B52 exist despite their age and cost. right tools for the right job. they can launch a hellacious raid both on land and now the sea with the B1 acting as a fleet support asset in pacific armed with various missiles.

a *single* B1 bomber which Obama grudgingly released to support the hard pressed kurds (ISIS in front, turks in back) @ Kobane, *took apart* entire ISIS controlled neighbourhoods by orbiting overhead. this is flying precision artillery with a sniper LDP. no more playing around with teeny weeny OFAB250 bombs like the russians do...these must be 2000lb weapons to take apart concrete apartments like sand castles.


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 22 Apr 2017 13:06

$10-15B just for "status"! :rotfl:

But seriously,no one is disputing the power that a carrier contains with sqds of strike aircraft,mobile on the high seas. The US,which declares itself as the "lone superpower" must possess 10-12 supercarriers to be able to threaten and thus cow down little upstarts like NoKo,etc. It needs overwhelming firepower to do the same.Hence the large fleet of super-large carriers.

Yet,despite its massive carrier capability,the US also requires smaller allies who possess smaller carriers,amphibs,etc. to "take up the slack" when Uncle Sam decides to sh*t on someone. You have "Little Britain",punching way above its weight,only because Britain's "uncle",Sam by name is bigger than any other power's "uncle"."Uncle" Putin ,Czar of all the Russias is also a powerful uncle,the only one who can stare Uncle Sam eyeball-to-eyeball,but he is very selective as to whom he supports and only where Russia's interests will be damaged severely.Uncle P has a much reduced global agenda requiring a alarge no. of carriers. He feels that his subs can do the biz.

The would-be-superpower,China,the arrogant ars*hole of Asia,and by the way since China is so fond of renaming Indian entities,I'm renaming Beijing as "Bullsh*t" and Shanghai as "Shithole", is building not only sev. large carriers but also a huge fleet of N-subs.I posted yesterday the new PRC facility that can build 4 N-subs at a time all under one roof,the world's largest! It is investing most heavily in its navy (GOI pl. take note),and post 2020/25 will have around 70-80 brand new subs and around 4-5 carriers. But all this is costing a massive fortune,something that India and the IN-which gets the smallest share of the defence halwa,does not have.

Therefore,we must "cut our coat according to our cloth".Regrettably,in reinvent years,some of the N's thinking has been influenced by the USN,which is a carrier first navy. AS said before,it can't afford everything and its allies like catamite UK,yaps at its heels. Having India with a few useful carriers that complement its own fleet is what the US intends to achieve,putting the IN to its good use first rather than India's! The huge no. of USN F-18s which are hangar queens,due to huge MRO problems/shortages/funds,etc., requires the US to seduce the IN to follow its line,not a strategy that puts India first. Our third carrier would best be a sister ship to the new Vikrant/IAC-1,with some mods and a little larger,so that commonality bears its own fruit in operations,crew/manning,and spares/support. Not to also mention similar aircraft. WE're told that 29K problems will be resolved by the OEM and wait for the same.In any case,even a Rafale-M can operate from the Vik-A,IAC-1 and IAC-2 if it is a sister ship as the CDG is a similar med. sized carrier too,albeit N-powered so that there is that extra power for CATS. One would rather have IAC-2 sometime around 2025 instead of the "status" carrier nowhere before 2030!

Our signal requirements are a balanced fleet ,of course comprising carriers (3),but one's that we can afford .Right now the sub fleet is in acute crisis where even our 6 Scorpenes will come without AIP while China's 8 subs sold to Pak and under construction will have the Stirling AIP system and will be armed with a variety of missiles that even our Scorpenes will not be able to match! BUulding subs is a long an arduous task.We've yet to master it,relying upon significant Ru help for our ATV/SSBN programme and Kilo upgrades. To meet the looming challenge from China and Pak requires a multi-lateral strategy for augmenting the sub fleet asap.Here are some options. Another point against the extra Scorpenes,they must have a better AIP system than MESMA which Pak is discarding in favour of the Stirling engine system (on Chinese boats).

1.3 extra Scorpenes to make up numbers.These must be AIP boats and able to fire BMos-L,Klub,etc.It will need a nod from Russia and must also be affordable as the current cost for non-AIP Scorpenes are an outrage. You can get 2 larger Kilos for just one Scorpene.

2.More upgraded Kilos. In a recent exercise with the USN,our Kilo "sank" a USN Los Angeles SSN.That speaks for itself! Perhaps 3+ more built at great speed,which is being done in Ru yards,will increase the no. of Kilos to 12.From 20025 or so,Kilos the first of the already upgraded will need replacing.
Remember that they will have undergone a second refit/upgrade and will have a definite lifespan. Because of the 9 in service,these subs will still be our principal type until 2030. The 6 Scoprpenes will not carry BMos,Klub,etc. but vastly inferior sub-launched Exocet and harpoon which Pak already posses! This is why Pak is going in for Chinese boats which will come with superior anti-ship/land attack cruise missiles.

3. A new Ru type such as Amur/Kalina. Even if we sign today,the first boat will arrive only 5 years hence. Leasing the 2 Amurs was an option,offered to us but it would mean that we must then choose that type as a second line of Ru diesel/AIP boats. Not knowing anything about the new Kalina design,construction of the first boat to begin shortly,and one assumes that it would be much better than an Amur,the interim solution of extra upgraded BMos Kilos makes more sense,until we know which boat suits us best.

4.More German U-boats so that our decades of experience with the excellent U-209s doesn't go waste. The 4 ins ervice have upgrade limitations and should be replaced in time with upto 8 new U-boats 214/216,whatever is affordable to us.I would plump for this as or 3rd line of conventional AIP subs,to replace the Scorpenes.However,even here the new U-boats must be compatible with our most fearsome weapon,BMos.

In all,at least 24+ conventional subs must be in the IN's sub fleet.,Ru,Fr,and German tech. In fact that's what we have at the moment!

5.N-subs:SSN/SSGN.These form a requirement in itself,apart from the diesel/AIP subs mentioned above. These subs will spearhead our multi-ocean blue-water ops anywhere on the globe,will have 90-100 days endurance,as against the 45+ endurance of most AIP subs,and will carry a wide range of missiles and torpedoes. They will be required to sink Chinese CBGs,convoys,etc.that threaten to ingress into the IOR (as the Enterprise did decades ago,which was tailed bu Sov. N-subs) before they enter our "backyard",in the ICS/Pacific. Our stated requirement is for 6 SSNs,One more Akula-2 SSGN is on order,much modified,and perhaps 2 more again leased from Ru ill provide us with enough capability until all our 6 N-boats are delivered.

6.Leasing more N-boats/diesel boats from Russia. For any immediate 'medicine',this is the only reasonable option until our domestic yards are in full swing building at least 2-3 subs/yr.L&T should be given the job of SSNs,VIzag SSBNs,and MDL SSKs (FR/German).KIlo/Ru iupgrades,etc. was already signed on by Pip/R.co. some time ago.

Russia's example of upgrading and returning to service its Cold War SSGNs is a moot point.The Oscars,Sierras,etc. ,have massive arsenals nd echo what the USN is doing with its old SSBNs,filling them up with huge arsenals of LRCMs like Tomahawaks.

These are just a few points to start the debate .Pl wade in and open fire!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 14:49

I would reduce the number of ssk to be kept stable at 10. Three more scorpene are almost certain. The 4 newest kilos which were delivered between 1997 to 2000 iirc should be able to serve another 15 years. The rest can retire one by one . A couple can be kept as training.

Rest of money must go into n sub program to scale up production and design

The only reason uk and france call themselves global reach is due to ssn and ssbn. Their carriers would be defeated by any smallish power like iran greece turkey egypt quite quickly

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2684
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 22 Apr 2017 16:14

Philip wrote:$10-15B just for "status"! :rotfl:

The would-be-superpower,China,the arrogant ars*hole of Asia,and by the way since China is so fond of renaming Indian entities,I'm renaming Beijing as "Bullsh*t" and Shanghai as "Shithole", is building not only sev. large carriers but also a huge fleet of N-subs.I posted yesterday the new PRC facility that can build 4 N-subs at a time all under one roof,the world's largest! It is investing most heavily in its navy (GOI pl. take note),and post 2020/25 will have around 70-80 brand new subs and around 4-5 carriers. But all this is costing a massive fortune,something that India and the IN-which gets the smallest share of the defence halwa,does not have.


We are not going to outbuild the arsehole in SSNs anyways so why not build the CVN?

Remember, we have a history of carrier aviation. We were the only Asian nation to launch aircraft off ships. It us our strength. The chinis conversely were the only Asian nation to sail nuke subs, it is their strength.

We are dead-ending at STOBAR just as the PRC is finally going into carrier aviation? Not if the IN brass have their way. And they know infinitely more than you, I or the babus in ministry.

We talk about a balanced fleet. But a balanced fleet for what? Some hypothetical war with the great fleet of Cheen that has a 0.001 % chance of happening? Why dhoti-shiver for a war could only happen if the PRC were immensely stupid enough to force its way though killing field choke points for a region that way down on its list of strategic interests. This is going to happen from a chickenshit Chinese military that refused to fight a war in four decades?

Build the CVN as a status symbol. A balanced fleet costing in the billions with SSNs would still do nothing but show the flag if no war actually happens.

Having India with a few useful carriers that complement its own fleet is what the US intends to achieve,putting the IN to its good use first rather than India's!


Sorry Mr. Phil, your pro-russkieness has completely unhinged you.

Why in hell would an Indian CATOBAR suddenly allow the US to put the IN to good use? Why would owning any category of vessel suddenly make the IN subservient to Unkil?

Again, all this talk about SSNs and balanced fleet is predicated on a naval war with Cheen that has a snowball's chance in hell chance of happening. The PRC is not going to give up Taiwan and its near seas for the IOR.

When a chini CBG sail into the IOR, it will only be in peace time. When that happens, I want a 65K ton CVN with EMALS meeting it so the shitty little nations around our rimland don't forget the elephant who lives in the region.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 17:57

I already said 2 vikrant and 2 hyuga is more than enough to show the flag. nobody has remotely anything like that in asia barring china-soko-japan off in the east. and they can show the flag in 4 different places and gang up if needed. this is a versatile combo and if you put 4 x DDG , 8 x FFG , 4xtankers and 4xSSN thats 4 different core task groups.


why on earth do you need a 330m CVN is beyond me

its like some guy is obsessed with a single BMW7 though his NEED is that of a accord for each of his 4 member family to go around doing different things.

now if Massa were giving us a refurbished nimitz class for free with the airwing thrown in as a bonus I am all for it. we can manage the opex.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7833
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Pratyush » 22 Apr 2017 18:07

Personally I would ask for a 300 ship navy. With 8 to 10 full size aircraft carriers. Along with 50 nuke attack stubs and 8 to 10 missile boats.

To be in service by 2040. The indian sea trade with the rest of the world will require such fleet.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 18:23

https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/21/h ... ff-alaska/

would love to see a pair of blackjacks in IN colours probing the cheen ADIZ off the hainan islands on a weekly basis.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4155
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 22 Apr 2017 18:35

OT, but speaking of such encounters, read this story long time back. Not sure if it really happened, but have seen this story on many sites.
The bold part is my fav.

"I was on the bridge in line to "drive the ship" as there are a bunch of O-5's and a few O-4's earning
our "Conning alongside" qual. It's gay shoe boy **** where you give commands to the helm and
lee helm (that's the throttle dude) and you our actually "flying formation" on the replenishment ship
during UNREPS. You do this under the close supervision of the Captain of the ship and the CDO (Command
Duty Officer-an O-5 usually the Navigator or ANAV).

Anyways, I'm sitting there bullshitting with my XO who is also getting his qual and we
hear on the CO's squawk box a call from CIC (Combat Info Ctr). They said,"Sir, we are getting
indications of Russian fighter activity." His first response was,"launch the alert fighters." Combat
told him the highest alerts were Alert 30's.

The Captain got pissed and said "launch everything we got ASAP!" I ran to the Navigators phone and
called the SDO. Our squadron didn't have alert duty that day, bummer, so I told him to find out
who did and to get their ass moving up to the flight deck (only alert 7's are you actually sitting
on the flight deck ready to go, alert 30's means you are in the ready room). Anyways, 40 min after the
CO called away the alerts, a Russian Su-27 Flanker and Su-24 Fencer made a 500 knot, 200 foot pass directly
over the tower...it was just like in Top Gun, shoes on the bridge spilled coffee and everyone
said,"Holllllllly shitttt!". I looked at the captain at this point and his face was red. He looked like he just walked in on his wife getting boned by a Marine. The Sukoi's made 2 more high speed, low altitude passes before we finally launched the first aircraft off the deck...an EA-6B Prowler! That's right. We launched a ****ing Prowler and he ended up in a 1 v 1 with a Flanker just in front of the ship. The Flanker was all over his ass (kind of like a bear batting around a little bunny right before he eats it). He was screaming for help when finally a Hornet from our sister squadron (I use this term in its literal sense because they looked
like a bunch of ****ing girls playing with the Sukoi's they way they did) got off the deck and made the
intercept. It was too late.
The entire crew watched overhead as the Russians made a mockery of our
feeble attempt of intercepting them albeit totally OBE. The funny part of the story was the Admiral and
the CAG were in there morning meeting in the War Room and they were interupted by the thundering roar of the
Russians buzzing the tower. A CAG staff dude told me they looked at each other and
looked at our Airplanes, noticed we didn't have flights scheduled until a few hours from now, and said,"what
was that?" "Four days later the Russian intelligence agency emailed the CO of the Kitty Hawk and enclosed pictures
they had taken of dudes scrambling around the flight deck frantically trying to get airborne. I'm quite
sure the ****ing loser shoe boy in charge of our battle group's air defense was fired. It's also ironic that
the Admiral change of command occurred just a few weeks prior to this incident. Anyways, the
Russians tried to come out a few other times and we were more than ready. I personally intercepted an
IL-38 May and shoved my wingtip in front of his windscreen to prevent him from turning towards the
ship (yeah yeah...we're friends now...blow me). In typical Navy Senior Officer Knee jerk fashion our
entire airwing stood alerts around the clock as if WW III was going to break out any time. I got vectored
and was instructed to intercept, VID and escort several "contacts of interest". One of them was an
Aeroflot A320. There were a few more that were even less threatening. It was ridiculous. This story was
plastered all over Russian and Japanese newpapers yesterday. The Russians even awarded their aircrew
medals for their achievement. What a ****ing shame! I felt like I was on the Bad News Bears and
we got our assess kicked and I didn't even get off the bench to help the team."


http://web.archive.org/web/200212081853 ... y%20JO.htm

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 22 Apr 2017 19:03

Vishnu Som‏ Verified account @VishnuNDTV

Incredible video of INS Teg launching a BrahMos land attack cruise missile yesterday

https://twitter.com/VishnuNDTV/status/8 ... 3333194752

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 19:10

a blackjack can carry around 12 smaller brahmos-M or maybe 6 brahmos-A and respond immediately from central india for a strike.

would really beef up our missile launching power.

the aeging H6 PLAAF bombers with ALCMs are a potent threat due to their long range.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 22 Apr 2017 19:29

Singha wrote:a blackjack can carry around 12 smaller brahmos-M or maybe 6 brahmos-A and respond immediately from central india for a strike.

would really beef up our missile launching power.

the aeging H6 PLAAF bombers with ALCMs are a potent threat due to their long range.


Strategic Bombers dont carry AntiShip missile , They are visible part of nuclear detterent , Suppose to fly off from Point A to Point B at the shortest possible time to launch multiple LACM with longest possible stand off range one can afford in nuclear mission , Due to speed and flexibility they can also cover many thousand Km in hours and drop its payload from any where it chooses to
During peace time they do probing mission (AD/Reaction time etc ) on long range patrol mission and during crisis they can be up on air loaded to declare a nations intent. During peace time low intensitty conflict they can do a conventional role you must be aware its role during Syrian Crisis
Last edited by Austin on 22 Apr 2017 19:31, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Apr 2017 19:30

^tu160s would be a great acquisition, but I'd even settle for backfires for now. The new ones could be suited up with Flanker radars, but even bigger, something they were tested for and kitted out for anti shipping duties along with long patrols and land strike.

I do see some benefit to a small jsf purchase as a silver bullet, both for iaf and IN... 36 each. 8-12 per carrier. They are leagues ahead of the fulcrums, capable as they are and more importantly, any PLAN or TSP weapon system at sea or land in the ior. Rather spend 4 billion on a vikrant II and another 9 billion for these instead of 25 billion on a cvn with full air wing of 65 raffles. And the would still be billions to spare

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 22 Apr 2017 19:32

Indian Navy's modernization plans in jeopardy

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... n-jeopardy


^^ VR alert

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 22 Apr 2017 19:36

^^
"Indian Navy's 15-year plan will require a funding support of around $123 billion," an Indian Navy official said. "This means an annual capital allocation around $8.5 billion as against this year['s] allocation of only $3 billion, 95 percent of which is already committed (for past contracts), leaving only $153 million for new programs
.

Is there any official document from MOD that states IN wants to spends $123 billion for next 15 years as part of its CAPEX.

I have read many times of Indian Planning to spend $250 billion in next 10 years as part of its capex etc etc

If there is no MOD docuement that offically spells out such plans and puts a figures to it for next 10 or 15 years, then its case of Khayali Pulav of making up a figure out of thin air and then crying why MOD cant spend that much , More of Authors imagination quoting Unnamed Sources

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 22 Apr 2017 20:05

I think intent is there but they can't or won't put it in writing for some reason.... Perhaps fear of being held accountable to it

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 22 Apr 2017 20:19

>> Strategic Bombers dont carry AntiShip missile

brar_w will have the details but the B1 bomber is now integrated into the US navys fight plans vs cheen or noko as a naval strike asset.
it was tested with LRASM 3 years ago and can carry 24 in a anti-A2AD role.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... tests.html

I am sure newer weapons can be dropped too.

the russians have been hamstrung because neither the bears or blackjacks are rigged with the racks, mission computers and LDPs needed for the long loiter conventional PGM role much needed over Syria and AfPak. infact even the backfires do not carry PGMs and do not have a LDP.

they are surely working to rectify this in next MLU and new blackjacks.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6628
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby brar_w » 22 Apr 2017 21:10

The upgraded (UAI) B-1 is the main large platform for the USAF's anti ship duties and is also the first platform to get the LRASM, even before the USN gets the capability on the Super Hornets. The B-21 will continue this multi-mission approach given its air-sea battle requirement. Given a common Interface and JASSMER configuration the B-1 can carry up to 2 dozen of these missiles. Long range, stand off anti surface mission is something opened up by the significant USN and USAF ISR capability both manned, and unmanned. In the absence of such a capability it would have been practically useless.

brar_w will have the details but the B1 bomber is now integrated into the US navys fight plans vs cheen or noko as a naval strike asset.
it was tested with LRASM 3 years ago and can carry 24 in a anti-A2AD role.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... tests.html

I am sure newer weapons can be dropped too.


The US B-1's are not strategic bombers under New Start so technically both you and Austin are correct.
Last edited by brar_w on 23 Apr 2017 03:09, edited 1 time in total.

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby tandav » 22 Apr 2017 22:42

Any reason why an older USN Aircraft Carrier is off the table for Indian Navy to cut its fangs on a super carrier. Say CVN 68 (Nimitz) through CVN 73. Or even the decommissioned CVN 67 John F Kennedy laid down in 1975.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cosmo_R » 22 Apr 2017 22:59

tandav wrote:Any reason why an older USN Aircraft Carrier is off the table for Indian Navy to cut its fangs on a super carrier. Say CVN 68 (Nimitz) through CVN 73. Or even the decommissioned CVN 67 John F Kennedy laid down in 1975.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy


Yes, there is a good reason why they are decommissioning them. Assuming they would be sold to us, we will the cost of refitting them (including reactor) will dwarf what it would cost us to build the Vishal from scratch. If we are hell bent on buying used CV(N)s, then the Prince of Wales which the UK is desperately trying to peddle to us, will be a better value.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2210
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby abhik » 23 Apr 2017 02:27

Austin wrote:Indian Navy's modernization plans in jeopardy

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... n-jeopardy


^^ VR alert

The Navy's long-term plan spells out the need for 198 warships by 2027, out of which 120 warships should be "capital warships," which would include large, offensive combat platforms like aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes and submarines. Against this requirement, the Indian Navy has just 140 vessels today, of which barely half are capital warships.

It's already too late for a ~50 "capital warship" increase by 2027, with the current build rate barely enough for replacing ships which need to get decommissioned. If one assumes a 30 year lifespan (post commissioning) we will need to replace the following: -
8 of the 9 Sindhughosh/Kilo subs
All 4 of the Shishumar/Type 209
All 5 Rajput class Destroyers
2 Godavari Frigates
8 of 10 Veer class Corvettes
All 3 Abhay Class
All 4 Khukri Class Corvettes
Plus the entire minesweeper fleet.

Against this we have the following planned to be coming in:-
4 15B destroyers
7 17A Frigates
Possibly 4 Russian Frigates
2+ Kamorta Class corvettes
Possibly new Missile boats
Possibly 1-3 SSNs
12(?) Minesweepers in collaboration with SoKo

BTW any clues on what the composition of those planned 198 ships are, how many subs, how many destroyers etc.?

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Bheeshma » 23 Apr 2017 03:42

What about the six NG missile corvette 16 Junta class ASW< 700 tonne and 8-9 more NOPV's

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Apr 2017 11:14

we need to find another 20 P28 sized ships from somewhere for a balanced posture. perhaps the private shipyards can help as its a smaller ship.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4155
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 23 Apr 2017 11:17

There was a tweet about Project 18 destroyers, if the first ship can be laid down in 2020, we can have 3-4 of these ships by 2027.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2684
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 23 Apr 2017 11:33

@Singha, I told you before that in carriers I am not logical. But yes, I would chose the BMW if I were projecting power around my neighborhood. The Hondas will not give me enough stature.

It just feels right that India should have a CVN. And after all the joint projects with the Russians we are going to go cheap when EMALS, AAG and a century of US technical experience in carriers are on the table?

The IN feels the same way. We have two top brass (Adm. Lanba and Vice Adm. Deshpande) saying they will ask again for this vision of a 65K ton CATOBAR. They are not looking for a 100000 ton Ford Class. This is not some outrageous behemoth. So while they admit they'll have to shelf some other items it won't be as apocalyptic as people are making it out to be ("a giant carrier and no subs.")

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7833
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Pratyush » 23 Apr 2017 13:24

The other issue is that our so called bleeding edge ships are approaching 1 billion dollahs. I find it hard to believe that with indian costs a ship will be that expensive to make.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Apr 2017 13:51

by value the cost fraction of imported is high. let us take P15A the newest class
- imported MFSTAR radar (fully owned by israel)
- licensed RAWL radar (royalties to thales)
- AK630 under license (royalties to rodina)
- licensed or imported Puma 100mm gun (rodina)/Oto76 (italy)
- RBU 6000 (rodina)
- Barak8 (rafael gets a share)
- gearbox (renk)
- engine (GE)
- brahmos (royalties to rodina)
- engine control systems
- torpedoes (varunastra not inducted in all ships yet)
- helicopter - none at present but will be USA or France there
- thales atlas towed sonar
I am sure there are plenty other odds and ends that are imported or licensed

if any of then jack up prices and act tough or face production line problems we get hit.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Apr 2017 13:58

we need to get long term control over costs with the following
- a big std desi SMART-L kind of 3D radar
- desi EO missile detection sensor "sirius"
- varunastra and takshak on all ships
- towed sonar from NPOL
- HAL IMRH with takshak
- a new CIWS gun based on the AK630 for land sea use
- SRSAM
- Sea Akash mk2 based on the barak8 motor but desi seeker and control tech
- desi sea based AESA fire control radar to replace the MFSTAR

I wouldnt hold my breath for the RBU(IN loves it!) and LM2500/Renk

think about the dozens of projects , funding, time needed to get all this done.... indigenization is a long long road in complex system of systems like warships and submarines

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4155
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 23 Apr 2017 14:05

Our ships still cost almost half to build compared to similar class of destroyers elsewhere.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests