Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

International Naval News and Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15768
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 11 Jun 2016 18:33

US Deploys Four Aircraft Carrier Strike Groups Amid South China Sea Tensions, Fight Against ISIS

And the standard reason:

The U.S. has deployed four aircraft-carrier strike groups in a move not seen in almost four years, Defense News reported late Monday.

It’s all been in the works for months as part of the Global Force Management program,” a Navy official said, underscoring that the deployments were not in response to specific crises.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 976
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Khalsa » 13 Jun 2016 04:28

Excellent explanation of the SH vs Mig-29K , brar.

I must admit, the half price thing did stick in my head.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 13 Jun 2016 14:16

^ Thanks. At the end of the day you have a Russian system, designed and built in russia and a US system. The economy's of the two nations are different, wages are different and there is also a lot less transparency on russian system contracted costs (Actually a $40 Million MiG is a much higher relative cost to Russia than even a $80 Million Shornet is to the US economy). The best place to look at the cost of a russian aircraft is to sift through news articles, while for the US most above a certain $ amount are required to publish a SAR, unless there is high system level classification (essentially reserved for the <5% of the systems that deserve such treatment). Within the SAR we can seperate Research, development, test and evaluation costs form acquisition costs, and within each acquisition cost category we can further seperate based on pure recurring fly-away cost, or a higher fly-away cost that includes initial bed down spares, support etc. We can also calculate the infrastructure cost that is unique to the system being acquired such as hanger upgrades, new construction as a result of the new system etc. The US gets its cost reduction through economies of scale because it will have, much like Europe significantly higher wages in aerospace compared to say a Russia or China. Its a given that Russian aircraft will be cheaper...

As the SAR shows the base fly-away (recurring) cost of the SH over its program was a tad below $60 Million per jet. This was achieved through a large order with high production run (Over 700 aircraft acquired). Reduce the production volume and the cost rises. A $35-40 Million MiG-29K, or $45 Million MiG-35 would always come in cheaper due to the difference in the economies of the two nations, but that was not what he was claiming. He was claiming that they were selling equal capability at half the cost with the MiG-29K which was a distortion of reality and doing so all along. While the reality is, that within he same post, he was seeking for an upgraded MiG-29K (modernization, perhaps at MLU he said) with capability the current block Rhino already possesses. Among western fighters, the Rhino has one of the lowest acquisition costs (over its production life) primarily because of its scale of production, rate of production and because it was based on an existing frame and transfered to an existing line. The F-35 will show a similar cost curve with production already surpassing 50 units per annum this year, and expected to more than double that by the end of the decade.

The MiG-29K is a great upgrade for the IN over the Harrier, and it will no doubt serve the IN well given that there was virtually no other realistic option since the aircraft essentially came with the carrier. Going forward, it becomes more cost-prohibitive to introduce a new type unless it s a long term decision (and for that they can well wait for the AMCA, N-FGFA, or F-35 to mature). Its a good aircraft, at a great price and hopefully the IN gets the most out of it and is well supported by the OEM. That in itself should be enough but he has to resort to making stuff up to somehow draw a comparison with a US aircraft and then claim superiority..and superiority at half the cost no less ;).

The Rhino is a strike fighter dubbed the best fit for the 'pragmatic navy' by the head of naval aviation in the USN a few years ago. As the comrade makes sure to point out virtually on a weekly basis, they went for a 'systems truck concept' where they maximized mission systems, missions system upgrades, and reliability' over out and out performance - and used it to justify doing way with the F-14D in favor of a smaller, cheaper and arguably a more upgradable aircraft that offers higher reliability. And if anyone had a doubt on it, the USN's role in Iraq, Syria, has shown the value. These aircraft are flying 500+ hours per year, with the first batch of Rhino's likely to complete their service life (6000 airframe hours) even before the last one is delivered. Within a sequestered budget, the USN is barely finding enough O&S cash to fly these aircraft and is borrowing spares from other units to the existing crafts in extended deployments (not unusual for long deployments, historically speaking). Imagine them having to do the same with an F-14D, that costs twice as much to operate, and probably broke down twice as often. What they lost out in all out interception and speed capability, they have more than compensated by fielding enhanced mission systems a decade+ ahead of the competition. F-18E/F's deployed in the western pacific already field the Aim-9X Block II, Aim-120D (Super Hornet units were spotted carrying the Aim-120D CATM last year in Japan and more than 1000 missiles had been delivered by the end of 2015), already field the higher capability data-links (Growler), can talk to the E-2D for CEC (SM6 is my wingman concept), and already field an upgraded AESA radar. In about 5 years the Rhino fleet will get fleet-wide EW upgrades, and the Growler fleet will get the Next Generation Jammer Increment 1. Other system wide Growler upgrades, and medium term RMA's are posted int he Int. Military thread. The Super Hornet is a good example of institutional support delivering large capability upgrades over short periods of time. Contrast that with the Eurofighter Typhoon that has fielded an expensive weapons system with partners trying to get out of their commitment to fund timely upgrades. It was a different approach and has resulted in a different timeline when it comes to integration of weapons and mission system timelines. Again, a superior weapons system not being kept up to date as well as the Rhino - something that would have happened to the USN as well, had they gone in for the F-14D, F/A-18C mix.

You can't really compare that to the MiG-29K since its been acquired in very small numbers by the IN and Ru Navy or even the MiG-35, that has been a test-article for many year and is expecting Egypt as its first customer, probably followed by Russia sometime between 2017 and 2020 (deliveries) for an unknown but unlikely to be, large quantities.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19598
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 13 Jun 2016 22:04


Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 976
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Khalsa » 15 Jun 2016 06:08

brar_w wrote: He was claiming that they were selling equal capability at half the cost with the MiG-29K which was a distortion of reality and doing so all along. While the reality is, that within he same post, he was seeking for an upgraded MiG-29K (modernization, perhaps at MLU he said) with capability the current block Rhino already possesses.


Bingo ... thats where i was attached to his argument as well.
Once again thanks for taking the pain to explain it the way you did.

Two questions
Which aircraft do you see embarking on the Vikrant ?
Can a Super Hornet do a Ski-Ramp Take off ? What does it take to get an aircraft to do that. Is it limited to the design or just something has to be worked out ?

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1372
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 15 Jun 2016 06:38

Khalsa wrote:Can a Super Hornet do a Ski-Ramp Take off ?


http://www.thehindu.com/business/article53220.ece

But Boeing IDS' Head for India, Dr Vivek Lall, told India Strategic that Boeing had done a computer simulation to verify that the Super Hornet could operate from Gorshkov and Indian carriers as and when they are commissioned.


http://www.informationdissemination.net ... craft.html
Rietz told reporters at Lemoore, which holds half of the US Navy’s striking power in the Pacific, “In our simulation, we discovered that not only could the Super Hornet take-off from a ski-jump, but could do so with a significant weapons load.” Landing the Super Hornet on the Gorshkov would pose no problem since the warship comes equipped with an arrester cable

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 15 Jun 2016 14:08

Two questions
Which aircraft do you see embarking on the Vikrant ?
Can a Super Hornet do a Ski-Ramp Take off ? What does it take to get an aircraft to do that. Is it limited to the design or just something has to be worked out ?


The Vikrant will house the Mig-29K and N-LCA, hopefully a larger number of the latter. Its cost prohibitive to integrate a new aircraft type into the fleet for just one carrier, and is still cost-prohibitive to go back and integrate it with the VikA. The IN is still getting MIg-29K deliveries and they will continue to develop their tactics using it since its quite a big leap from he Harriers. The real fun starts when they have a lot more N-LCA's and can really develop tactics to best utilize it. The decision point for a future aircraft will come post IAC-2 design freeze, as it may give them an opportunity to re-look at their future carrier air wing for the 2030's, and 2040's and hopefully a more mature NLCA-2 ++ and even the nascent AMCA is in the play there. Other candidates would most likely include the Rafale (if still in production), N-FGFA (with development cost of course) F-35C, and perhaps the Mig-29K if that platform is still in production then. I doubt the Super Hornet would be around in the 2020's (beyond say the first year or two of the decade) but who knows what happens in that time-frame.

While Boeing did work with the IN to see the feasibility of the SH on a ski-ramp, and they have a ski ramp at Lakehurst that they could have rented to do a full demo, the overall cost increase associated with the VikA would have made integrating a new non-russian type with the carrier a risky proposition when it came to time and money.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15768
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 15 Jun 2016 15:08

Which aircraft do you see embarking on the Vikrant ?


MiG-29K. From day one, that was the plan.

Expect the LCA too.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 15 Jun 2016 17:27

why not test the aircraft from the SBTF in Goa and arrive at a real conclusion rather than read about simulations and second hand information. WRT the sky jump take off capability.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 15 Jun 2016 18:00

Pratyush wrote:why not test the aircraft from the SBTF in Goa and arrive at a real conclusion rather than read about simulations and second hand information. WRT the sky jump take off capability.


Why and what for? All This was done in the last decade. Boeing did the simulations no doubt to inform the IN at that stage. If there was more serious interest expressed, Boeing could have simply rented the facility at Lakehust ( and pay for reactivation) and done further demonstrations to inform the decision further. Its really cost-prohibitive to try to integrate another fighter into your fleet for essentially a 2 carrier Navy given that 2 will already be integrated. Such a decision may be justified if a larger carrier with CAT’s is chosen or if they commit to a constant enhancement of carrier and carrier air wing capability over the longer arc of time. It costs money to lease a jet from an OEM, and set up and run a demonstration program and its rather pointless if there is no real requirement to support that.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 976
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Khalsa » 16 Jun 2016 00:04

Dear Brar_W, NRao and others

Many thanks. The fog lifts.

I hope the Navy again pours it money and best efforts into AMCA only with one eye on the F-35 incase AMCA does not work out for Navy.
IMHO the FGFA is starting to look like another VikramAditya Story if the Russians don't tighten the way they do business.
Pouring Navy's limited budget in the Naval-FGFA ... yeah lets stay away from that.

Someone posted a video (perhaps you) about a US Admiral or professor who had submitted various designs of Aircraft carriers etc.
And the way he compared the payload of a Skiramp vs Catapault vs amazing.
Very bullish but very true.

the IAC-2 must not be ski-ramp. We gotta shoot-launch these things with max payload + max fuel to dominate.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 19 Jun 2016 20:51



Two CBG's in the Philippine Sea


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19598
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Jun 2016 22:22

Submarine Development Program - Brazilian Navy (English version)


member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1104
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 19 Jun 2016 22:41

With the current political and economic crisis the PROSUPER and PROSUB aren't really going anywhere. Even the Barroso hasn't found any favor with their navy and they want more modifications.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4331
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 20 Jun 2016 09:30

Interesting to read that the RN ships are having trouble working in tropical waters!

Britain's Royal Navy warships are breaking down because sea is too hot

Britain's £1bn ($1.4bn) warships are losing power in the Persian Gulf because they cannot cope with the warm waters, MPs have been told.

Six Type 45 destroyers have repeatedly experienced power outages because of the temperatures, leaving servicemen in complete darkness.
...
...
Waters in the Persian Gulf can get as hot as 90 degrees F (32 degrees C). Leahy told MPs that turbines do not generate as much power when they run in a hot environment, which is not recognized by the system.
"This is when you get your total electrical failure," Leahy explained.
"Suddenly, you have lost your main generator on your system and you are plunged into darkness."
However, a spokesperson from Britain's Ministry of Defence (MoD) denied this, telling CNN: "The Type 45 was designed for world-wide operations, from sub-Arctic to extreme tropical environments, and continues to operate effectively in the Gulf and the South Atlantic all year round."
...

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19598
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 20 Jun 2016 09:39

Reading briefly its a case of Engine being able to operate at Hot and High Climatic condition , Experiencing derating due to high temperature while the same works well in their climatic condition , same problem our Jags faced operating in hot climate with odour engine

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 20 Jun 2016 13:54

DDG-1001, USS Micheal Monsoor Christening :


Image

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19598
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 20 Jun 2016 15:01

Bheeshma wrote:With the current political and economic crisis the PROSUPER and PROSUB aren't really going anywhere. Even the Barroso hasn't found any favor with their navy and they want more modifications.


Its just a passing phase wrt to economic and political upheaval . Their main concern would be lack of industrial capability to make nuke reactor for SSN plus the SSN itself that more of a big challenge

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

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 21 Jun 2016 09:27



Very educative documentary.

One thing they explain in last 5-6 mins is how pennsylvania sub is the only stealthy sub cause , it uses a propeller that moves very very slowly but extra blades, so the slowness of propeller doesn't made sub slow as the 4 extra blades generate extra power.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 23 Jun 2016 01:40

DDG 1000 and 1001 together :

Image

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1436
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 25 Jun 2016 08:54

Buying MIG-29 for IN was the only choice that IN had. But will our naval MIGs be able to operate in Western Pacific and in SCS is still not clear. Right now PLAN's aircraft carrier is just a show piece. But once it and it's sister ship are ready and loaded with SU-33 or its Chinese knock off those aircraft will be superior to the MIGs that IN fields. While we had no choice with regard to MIG-29 let us not tie ourselves down just on cost. Capability is very important and in certain cases trumps cost. We may field 100's of these fighters but if they have a shorter range and are less capable then they will not be able to do the missions that we ask them to do.Moreover if we field 100's of these fighters money spent on them will be wasted. Let us not discount the possibility of PLAN aircraft carriers equipped with Su-33 and it's knock off operating in the Ocean that bears our name not only to save Paki-land but also to harm us.

The choice is not between MIG-29 and Hornet's. It is a choice between which aircraft will have a higher range and/or higher survivability and/or stealth capability compared to what PLAN can field. In such a manner that a PLAN admiral knows sending a PLAN aircraft carrier against IN would be suicidal, not only in our Ocean but also in SCS and Western Pacific

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 Jun 2016 17:28

US Navy marks new steps in manned/unmanned cooperation with latest MQ-4C & P-8A Test

The US Navy has made two further steps in the field of manned-unmanned cooperation. At a flight test in 2 June 2016, a Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton unmanned air system (UAS) and a Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) showcased two new key capabilities that will bring maritime operations to a new level.The two platforms were successful in exchanging full motion video via Common Data Link (CDL) during flight. It was the first time that the UAV and the aircraft conducted such an interoperability operation. The Triton tracked a target with its electro-optical/infrared camera and transmitted the video to a P-8, which was flying at a distant area.

In practice this means that the P-8 could remain out of a high-threat area whilst maintaining coverage of that area, have early warning long before it reaches a designated area of patrol or simply focus on a core mission leaving the secondary to the unmanned platform.

Moreover, last week, an MQ-4C Triton completed its second heavy weight flight configuration, at a height of 30,000 feet. That test will allow the expansion of the platforms estimated time on station significantly.

As US Navy Cmdr Daniel Papp, Triton integrated programme team leader, said, “the heavy weight envelope expansion work will enable Triton to realize its long dwell capability and become the unblinking eye for the fleet.”

More tests will take place in the following months until Triton’s full operational capability status and operational deployment with the US Navy.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35341
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 22 Aug 2016 02:18


g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1331
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby g.sarkar » 23 Aug 2016 22:44

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 831072.cms
China ups preparations for deployment of 1st aircraft carrier
BEIJING: China has stepped up preparations for the deployment of its first aircraft carrier force after the country's new batch of carrier-based fighter pilots graduated this month.
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has built up its largest carrier-based pilot team after more than three years of intensive training.
After an effective ground-based training, a new batch of pilots has just received aircraft carrier flight certification, state-run People's Daily Online reported.......
Gautam

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 976
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Khalsa » 24 Aug 2016 01:20

SaiK wrote:https://twitter.com/saikanomie/status/767462966350475264

why?


because of the folks you see behind the un-manned drone.
Shooting and retrieval is a deck affair all-in-all.

The Pilot (of a manned aircraft) at the time has little say except to push his throttle forward to maximum and do a Thumbs up.
The Shooter is letting him know whats happening when he is about to be shot.
The shooter is also over all responsible for making the call if the mechanism to shoot him is in place and @ 100%.

So he is sending cues to the pilot and the control operators.

In the picture above the pilot is missing, the control operators are still tuned in to his cues.

chaitanya
BRFite
Posts: 129
Joined: 27 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: US
Contact:

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby chaitanya » 07 Sep 2016 10:04

While not exactly a weapons platform, something like this could be easily modded to create a sub-hunting network with hydrophones:

No Sailors Needed: Robot Sailboats Scour the Oceans for Data

Image

The Saildrone autonomous sailboats look a little like shrunken America’s Cup racing yachts — small trimarans with hard, carbon-fiber sails. The Saildrone’s carbon fiber sail acts like an aircraft wing. When air passes over it, thrust is created. The sail is stabilized by a counterweight that is placed in front of it and a tab trailing behind it that can automatically make small corrections to make sure it maintains an efficient angle to the wind. Underneath the boat are both a rudder to aid in steering and a keel, which will right the boat if it is knocked over.

The big difference, of course, is that there are no sailors on board. The boats are controlled through communications satellites from the operations center here as they collect oceanographic data and monitor fish stocks and the environment.

One day, they may be used for weather prediction, oil and gas industry ocean operations, or even to police illegal fishing.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60267
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 07 Sep 2016 10:21

^ i think thats inevitable....these passive mobile buoys would call in UAV/LRMP and network among themselves to "hand off" potential targets
by the time people are done with its feature list though the cost will not be less than a manned asw corvette. same thing happened with global hawk.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20265
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 16 Sep 2016 05:37

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/watc ... 59384.html
Watch the US Navy test its new ship against 10,000 pound bombs

The USS Jackson, an Independence-class Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) meant for patrols in shallow water, just passed the first of three scheduled "shock trials." The shock trials are composed of the ship sailing along as the Navy carefully detonates 10,000 pound bombs on either side of it. The results are then measured.“The shock trials are designed to demonstrate the ship’s ability to withstand the effects of nearby underwater explosion and retain required capability,” according to a Navy statement.“This is no kidding, things moving, stuff falling off of bulkheads ... Some things are going to break. We have models that predict how electronics are going to move and cabinets are going to move, but some things are going to happen, and we’re going to learn a lot from this test,”
https://youtu.be/4jdnG90ipo8?t=4

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

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 16 Sep 2016 07:04

^ Is this uniquely a USN test, or any other navy also conducts it?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60267
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 16 Sep 2016 10:04

all warship builders have to do. warships are full of redundancy, damage control and protective measures vs a commercial ship and a lot of electrical power to drive the sensors and weapons. packed very tight even in a carrier.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby TSJones » 16 Sep 2016 10:56

no, not all navies set off 10,000 lbs of explosives to check hull integrity or for internal stresses. they conduct various componentry tests but not gigantic explosions.

and it should be noted the US only does this on new model types such as the Gerald R Ford carrier or submarines. the Ford test was done off the coast of Florida and the residents there reported(thought) an earthquake had happened, :rotfl:
Last edited by TSJones on 16 Sep 2016 14:18, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17237
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 16 Sep 2016 12:19

The 7th Yasen will be laid down during the middle of next year.

Russian New Yasen-Class Nuclear Subs Able to Carry All Sea-Based Cruise Missiles © Photo: press-service of JSC "PO "Sevmas

RUSSIA 15:08 29.07.2016(updated 15:28 29.07.2016) Get short URL 21444150 According to the sub’s designer, Russia’s new Yasen-class nuclear submarines are able to fire all sea-based cruise missiles from the country’s arsenal. © SPUTNIK/ PRESS-SERVICE OF JSC "PO "SEVMAS Russia'a 7th Yasen-Class Attack Submarine to Be Laid Down in July 2017 SEVERODVINSK (Russia) (Sputnik) – Russia’s new Yasen-class nuclear submarines are able to fire all sea-based cruise missiles from the country’s arsenal, the sub’s designer said Friday. A sixth Yasen-class submarine, the Perm, was laid down in Severodvinsk earlier today, with four more vessels of this class under construction. "Yasen subs can be fitted with all types of cruise missiles that can be fired from submarines," Vladimir Dorofeyev, the director general of the Malakhit Design Bureau, told RIA Novosti.

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/russia/20160729 ... siles.html

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60267
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 16 Sep 2016 18:27

Very heavy investment to have 5 subs in various stages of production

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2199
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby darshhan » 16 Sep 2016 19:54

Singha wrote:Very heavy investment to have 5 subs in various stages of production


Similar story for borei class ssbn. Russians do not believe in pussyfooting.

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

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Bheeshma » 16 Sep 2016 22:05

I hope IN is bargaining for yasen class on lease. If we have to buy 3 more talwars it better come with a Yasen class included. I can't see IN going for Shtrom carrier.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 30 Sep 2016 15:00

Navy Conducts its Longest Range Anti-Air Warfare Intercept

WASHINGTON — The Navy successfully completed the longest range anti-air warfare intercept in its history at the Point Mugu Test Range in California, Sept. 22, the service announced in a Sept. 29 release.

During the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) test, the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Princeton, equipped with the latest Aegis Baseline 9, successfully processed data from a remote airborne sensor to engage and destroy an over-the-horizon threat representative target using the Standard Missile-6 (SM-6).

This is not the first time that SM-6 has shattered its own distance record. The missile broke the previous long-range intercept record in January onboard the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS John Paul Jones at Pacific Missile Range Facility.

This NIFC-CA test was the 10th consecutive successful live-fire test to demonstrate an over-the-horizon, engage-on-remote capability. This particular test also successfully validated the NIFC-CA from the sea kill chain concept.

“NIFC-CA is a game changer for the U.S. Navy that extends the engagement range we can detect, analyze and intercept targets at sea,” said Rear Adm. Jon Hill, the program executive officer for Integrated Warfare Systems. “This test is a significant accomplishment, one that will shape the future of surface warfare.”

NIFC-CA From The Sea is a program of record that uses four pillar programs to act as a kill chain for the surface fleet: Aegis Baseline 9.0, Cooperative Engagement Capability, E-2D Hawkeye and SM-6.

“We are looking at every ship as a potential offensive weapons platform in an effort to gain and maintain sea control,” said Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, commander, Naval Surface Forces.
“Neutralizing enemy cruise missiles at range, as demonstrated in this test, is one of the dramatic leaps forward the surface force is making to implement the concept of Distributed Lethality and extending the offensive battlespace.”

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby TSJones » 30 Sep 2016 22:02

......and they have a new SM-3 underdevelopment which I understand is longer range than the SM-6.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5763
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby brar_w » 30 Sep 2016 22:50

SM3 is a exoatmospheric BM defense system while the SM6 is an long range anti aircraft, cruise and ballistic missile weapon. Not comparable at all.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 30 Sep 2016 23:42

chaitanya wrote:While not exactly a weapons platform, something like this could be easily modded to create a sub-hunting network with hydrophones:

No Sailors Needed: Robot Sailboats Scour the Oceans for Data

Image

While on a visit to the Earth Observatory of Singapore, I was first introduced to wave gliders. The researchers of EOS were using it for studies of the ocean floor. The design is very very stable as the CG is way below the waterline. They have never had a boat overturn, or run out of power, although they are barely larger in size than a surfboard. EOS used theirs for weeks on end guided by preset GPS coordinates. In fact, other researches have made them cross the Pacific ocean.

Image


TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Naval News and Discussion

Postby TSJones » 01 Oct 2016 10:27

brar_w wrote:SM3 is a exoatmospheric BM defense system while the SM6 is an long range anti aircraft, cruise and ballistic missile weapon. Not comparable at all.


while they may not be comparable, a lot of destroyers have SM-3's. If it comes to defense of the fleet they are not going to sit on their hands as hostile a/c approaches.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_S ... _Missile_3

The authors of the SM-3 study cited only tests involving unitary targets, and chose not to cite the five successful intercepts in six attempts against separating targets, which, because of their increased speed and small size, pose a much more challenging target for the SM-3 than a much larger unitary target missile. They also did not mention the fact the system is successfully intercepting targets much smaller than probable threat missiles on a routine basis, and have attained test scores that many other Defense Department programs aspire to attain.[13]


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Chinmay, Google Feedfetcher, JayS, sgopal and 51 guests