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

Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

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.
arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby arshyam » 23 Apr 2017 14:58

chola wrote:@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.
chola wrote: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.

When you are projecting this power around the IOR, do the "projectees" care about whether it is nuke propelled or not? 65K will give us a decent sized carrier, but having observed China they are going to imitate the khan and build a bunch of 95K ton carriers going forward. At that point, will you want us to build such behemoths just to impress our neighbours? Where does it end?

Let's build to our own needs; and first try to quantify what those needs are. If we want a nuke carrier to simply strut around the IOR, what are the advantages that brings as compared to a conventional one? How big do the accompanying destroyers and frigates need to be? How much range and speed should they all have? Do we have enough n-subs to keep up with such a carrier group? The diesels with their piddly <5kn under battery won't cut it (surely they can't snorkel and accompany a carrier).

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7286
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Pratyush » 23 Apr 2017 15:09

They are comparable to DDG 51 in cost while having a fraction of war fighting capability.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby abhik » 23 Apr 2017 16:40

Singha wrote: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.

A true league of nations with US, Russia, France, Israel, Ukraine and more (I'm sure a lot of the smaller components come from PRC) taking part. I believe even basic items like propellor shaft come from Russia.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58792
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Apr 2017 17:12

We need a mk41vlski badly in normal and strike length to max out and mix missile loads

And relocation of rbu in low rcs housings on each beam.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 23 Apr 2017 17:41

To be fair, Navy did plan acquisition of a large number of vessels to suit all spheres of naval warfare. Infact, we are now in a period post a decade long boom in fleet expansion .... the navy is strong like the 1980s.

Of the planned ships the following have just got stuck due to plain bad luck:

- 05 x NOPV
- 03 x CTS
- 03 x Makar Class

That's more than 10 ships just stuck because the yards have undergone financial distress. Sadly, these orders could have given a great fillip to private construction of warships in the country.

My only criticism with of the order book today, as that the smallest Indian multirole ship are Project 17A Frigates, which are actually destroyers. If we hit budgetary limits, then we need a cheap multirole, jack of all trades kind of design. Project-28 ASW corvettes are too focussed. I think we are missing a modern day Leander type vessel, or may I even say something like a F-22P type frigate.

abhik wrote:....
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

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 23 Apr 2017 18:30

True.Our ships come in much cheaper than wetstern equivs.Look at the cost of a little LCS which has an "underarm" problem! :rotfl:( pardon the pun).They are to be upgunned in the future.

Anyway, China's grandiose ambition is to take on mano-a-mano the USN,its Asian allies and India and has constituted 5 theatre commands for the same.We are still mulling over whether we need a JCS let alone graduate to theatre command thinking! They are a decade ahead of us in mil-strategy. That's why China needs 5-6 carriers,to challenge the USN's CBGs and send in at least one into the IOR which will be based at Gwadar and rotated with its sister ships on a regular basis.

Our air force has no bomber capability at all-zilch,we've just retd. our only LR strike asset,the IN's bears,which are still as we speak tickling Uncle Sam's bunghole in Alaska and tweaking the whiskers of the British "Lion"...sorry,"pussycat" with regular runs testing its air defences. I only hope that the retirement of Bears means that a new type of supersonic strike bomber is planned.

Our sub acquisition planning,has anyone seen it? P-75I was to have started commissioning subs ,but hasn't even finalised the design,strat. partner,whatever! The only realistic option also keeping costs in mind is to acquire a few more Kilos ( easy to operate,support,etc.) and/or Amurs ,even on lease,beef up numbers of conventional subs,plus another 2 Akulas.Russia is building its new N-boats at a rapid rate and may transfer a couple more which are in service. The 6 Scorpenes have had their basic capability "outed",are not AIP subs and do not have anything like BMos let alone Klub missiles.

Once we get our SSN line humming,plus the follow on type after the Scorpenes, the timelag to meet the numbers reqd. will shorten. I would still prefer to increase the size/capability of the LPDs to at least Juan Carlos capability. This will give us breathing time before we can find funds to udnertake building the 65K t dream.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby brar_w » 23 Apr 2017 18:41

Can someone familiar with the details post the approximate cost of the various IN frigates and destroyers?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58792
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 23 Apr 2017 19:31

P75i is indeed a shambles. No domestic research efforts seem to ongoing in ssk systems barring aip and hwt.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 23 Apr 2017 19:31

There are off. costs,but there are also the cost-overruns which from time to time the CAG mentions in its reports. Some available details .
Current programmes:

1.Corvettes/Light Frigates: P-28 Kamorta's supposedly $1B for 4 X 3,500t vessels which are lightly armed.no missiles at all despite the size,escalated to $1.*B,with each ship now costing a whopping $600M!

2.Frigates: P-17As: Shivalik follow-on FFGs at 6,500t to cost around $!.25B + each (estimated only).

3.Destroyers: P-15Bs Visakhapatnam class at 7,500+t ,each around $1.25B estimated cost. Hard to see this est. kept as it is equiv to the smaller lesser armed P-17A class. When completed ,with advanced BMos,B-8s,et al,these ships should cost around $!.%B at least.

4.Frigates: Russia/India. Adm.Grigorivich/Talwar 4,000t ,follow-on FFGs,2 to be completed in India ,2 in Russia.The deal is f$4B for 4 FFGs,each costing approx. $1B .

5.ASW corvettes (shallow water):700t,16 planned,armed with torpedoes,ASW rockets and LMGs ,around $125M-140M apiece.

6.NOPVs: 2000t.extra modules for weaponry can be fitted when required,part of the design.Std. weaponry,76mm main gun,2X 30MM CIWS,1X SKing ASW helo. Cost around $110M.

Haven't mentioned the 4 LPDs and IAC-1 as one will know the cost only when they've been completed. The IN usually makes some changes during the construction period (sensors/weaponry),annoying to the builder,complicating matters.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby abhik » 23 Apr 2017 20:14

Singha wrote:P75i is indeed a shambles. No domestic research efforts seem to ongoing in ssk systems barring aip and hwt.

The BRF thread is titled 'Project 75I- It Begins' is a cruel joke. No sign of movement even as the Magazon Scorpene line is slowly winding down to a close.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2555
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 23 Apr 2017 20:48

abhik wrote:
Singha wrote:P75i is indeed a shambles. No domestic research efforts seem to ongoing in ssk systems barring aip and hwt.

The BRF thread is titled 'Project 75I- It Begins' is a cruel joke. No sign of movement even as the Magazon Scorpene line is slowly winding down to a close.

My guess is it will be an upgraded and stretched scorpene

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2555
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 23 Apr 2017 20:52

Aditya G wrote:. If we hit budgetary limits, then we need a cheap multirole, jack of all trades kind of design. Project-28 ASW corvettes are too focussed. I think we are missing a modern day Leander type vessel, or may I even say something like a F-22P type frigate.


I'm guessing they are standardizing on the talwar class... A bit pricey, but cheaper than most and decent multi file capability.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby dinesh_kimar » 23 Apr 2017 21:05

A true league of nations with US, Russia, France, Israel, Ukraine and more (I'm sure a lot of the smaller components come from PRC) taking part. I believe even basic items like propellor shaft come from Russia.


This league of nations might soon be joined by a SAARC country, Sri Lanka. They are an expert at making large ship propeller shafts, and much better than us in this area (We mostly import, with some local content, and need hand holding from foreign experts during final assembly / alignment.) They are also good at building Super Dvora type Fast Attack Craft, with many local versions.

arvin
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 54
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby arvin » 23 Apr 2017 21:34

Singha wrote:P75i is indeed a shambles. No domestic research efforts seem to ongoing in ssk systems barring aip and hwt.


Navy seems to have fallen in love with nuclear with 6 SSN on drawing board and an Nuclear carrier in planning stage. Atleast HWT will be used in all our subs with a confirmed long order book. But that AIP installed only on only 3 more scorpenes(if approved) will not be vfm.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 755
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby SriJoy » 24 Apr 2017 00:42

Hello folks, this is my first post on this forum.Since i do not see a thread to introduce new members, i will make it quick and short- I've been lurking for a few years now, but finally decided to join up. One of the greatest boards i've ever visited, so glad to be part of the community here. :D

With that out of the way, I wanted to comment on the Navy air wing (i.e., carrier-based aircrafts).

I am no expert on the matter, but it seems to me that our Mig-29K is a bust. So what are the alternatives ? Again, BRF-gurus feel free to correct me, but it seems like the internet says in-order to have a successful STOBAR carrier-based fighter, it needs a greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio.

Apparently that negates the Su-33, though I'd be curious to know why the Chinese are able to use it and we are not ?

The other question i have, if we suffer the rate of attrition with Mig-29K, would it not make sense to get some Eurofighters, considering Wiki is showing it to have >1 Thrust-to-weight ratio, in its 'loaded weight' configuration ?
Apparently the Rafale-M also has greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio in configuration that has 100% internal fuel, 2 EM and 2 IR A2A missiles.

Thanks for the input !

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5336
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Indranil » 24 Apr 2017 04:41

Welcome to the forum. I am sure many will help you out with your questions, but first you have to change your handle to a human-sounding name. Second, you have asked your questions on the wrong thread. There is an Indian naval aviation thread.

To quickly answer some of your questions Don't trust the internet. Mig-29Ks problems are not related to TWR at all. It can take off from Vikramditya with full weapons load.

Operationally, the Rafales don't do much better on CDG, or the F-18s on Umreeki aircraft carriers, or the Su-33s on the Russi or Chinese carriers. You can gauge what the Russi's think about the Mig-29K vs the Su-33 by their latest orders when they could have decided either way. F-18s have had the benefit of proper funding and iterative refinement given the size of the fleet. Mig-29Ks problems are related to the lack of funding to properly strengthen the airframe for shipborne operations. Russians provided diddly-squat except allowing Mikoyan to sell their designs to China to stay afloat. Then India salvaged the program 29K program. Mikoyan dusted up their old files and did whatever they thought was sufficient to field the Mig-29K on ships. I have reason to believe, that theig-29Ks in IN's fleet. The question really is whether India should spend to refine a Russi plane, from which no further development is to come.

India should not get anywhere near the Sea Gripen. They have zero experience in developing a naval fighter. Believe it or not, we lead the Swedes by a good decade in naval aircraft design, and multiple decades in operational experience. Navalized Eurofighter has been studied in depth. But it is a paper plane for which there is no market even in its home countries.

IN ultimately needs NAMCA. Question is how does it get there
1. Spend money on fixing Mig-29K, develop LCA-Navy Mk2 on the way to NAMCA, or
2. Junk LCA-Navy Mk2, Mig-29K and buy alternate aircrafts for ship borne operations till NAMCA arrives.

No matter what it chooses, it has lit the burner under ADA's asses which primarily focused on Tejas and kept ignoring LCA-Navy in spite of Navy's great support. I think it was required. But how to get our Russi-brothers to cooperate is a different matter altogether.
Last edited by Indranil on 24 Apr 2017 07:21, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: id changed

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9368
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby sum » 24 Apr 2017 05:18

This league of nations might soon be joined by a SAARC country, Sri Lanka. They are an expert at making large ship propeller shafts, and much better than us in this area

How did they manage to achieve this whereas we are still in this state despite "building complete ships" for past 30-40 years?

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1141
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 24 Apr 2017 10:57

Cosmo_R wrote:
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.


They are strategic assets like SSBNs. Even the UK don't get one to preserve their carrier skills and instead had to build their own.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1141
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 24 Apr 2017 11:13

sum wrote:
This league of nations might soon be joined by a SAARC country, Sri Lanka. They are an expert at making large ship propeller shafts, and much better than us in this area

How did they manage to achieve this whereas we are still in this state despite "building complete ships" for past 30-40 years?


Is this true? I would be very surprise if so. Also a major disappointment at our own industry.

Props to Singha for listing the phoren pieces to our warships. Always sort of knew but didn't have the heart to actually look at the breakdown.

There must be a price/size/technology intersection point that we can pump out as the "jack of all trades." Maybe a 1000-ton corvette that can use all domestic gear and weapons? It doesn't have to be 6500 tons like the P17A.

The P17 is a DDG in size not a FFG. And far too expensive at $1.2B for a frigate which is supposed to give us numbers.

The funny thing is we are always going LCA, LCH, blah blah for our aviation projects but many of our warship classes are far larger than global norm for OPVs, corvettes and frigates.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 24 Apr 2017 12:39

Subs: We can't afford an all nuclear fleet like the US.Too expensive,plus all N-boats not reqd. for the littorals.Russia uses both N and conventional subs,China does too.Gives both numbers and quality. The path the IN must follow. However,at least 6 SSNs,plus a few SSGNs (Akulas) are needed to counter the future PLAN CVs,as well as give our SSBN fleet and carrier task forces some cover if and when rqd. I would postulate 10 N-boats (4 SSGNs + 6 SSNs) apart from the reqd. no. of SSBNs.

Some time ago I was discussing with a pal.the OPV design and we both concluded that that was the most cost-effective way in which the IN could make up numbers.However,the OPVs are underarmed.The new ones have been designed to carry extra modules for additional weaponry ,and we hope that's true. It would bre good to have a few fitted with the options so that they can be tested in naval exercises by the IN and tactics/weaponry refined.
Secondly,the CG must also step up the ladder.I don't know why it cannot be tasked with mundane,but v.important tasks nearer the coast like mine countermeasures,some inshore ASW duties ,harbour defences,etc. using UUVs,UAVs,helos ,etc. The CG also operates OPVs and these vessels should have provisions for TAS,torpedoes,MBUs,MCM gear etc. The little 400t Pauk/Abhay class carried the same dunking sonar as the KA-28,plus had a good ASW package,fast,all on the same hull as the Tarantula missile corvette. Why the IN has not standardised with some of its designs baffles me as they is huge capital cost and operational savings that can be made. Our future shallow water ASW corvettes of 700t+ are pedestrian compared with the Pauks for speed. In prosecuting subs as well as evading "fish",speed helps a lot. WE could've enlarged upon the Pauk/Abhay design,throwing in a flight deck at the stern ,above the TAS,with some extra space for additional weaponry/SR SAMs.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58792
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Apr 2017 16:48

the OPVs can surely carry 8 harpoon/uran each. the mounts on P15/P25 ships are quite compact. and it needs the garpun bal radar to send them off.

but I feel the more important need is arm them with sonar and heavy torpedoes ....

Will
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Will » 25 Apr 2017 01:35

abhik wrote:
Singha wrote:P75i is indeed a shambles. No domestic research efforts seem to ongoing in ssk systems barring aip and hwt.

The BRF thread is titled 'Project 75I- It Begins' is a cruel joke. No sign of movement even as the Magazon Scorpene line is slowly winding down to a close.


Yes. Should have named it the P75l- Tragedy :evil:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 25 Apr 2017 06:25

Hey guys - don't self flagellate. Remember that on Twitter and on other fora Pakis. Chinese and others are saying exactly that sort of critical stuff about India. And this happens on BBC, CNN, Phuckington post etc. And you know what - by echoing those foreign critics we show how we "patriots" too behave like we are outsiders looking in on Indians and mocking. And we blame the press and NDTV/leftists for behaving that way like outsiders picking on every possible fault in India. Ironic.

I don't for a minute buy the nonsensical excuses made that claim that "We are dharmic and truthful. Truth hurts. Look at China. West is the gold standard" etc. Give our people and nation the leeway they need without constantly bashing up Indians. Do not contribute to the huge mass of criticism our people, nation and culture are subjected to in every nation and "news medium"

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 25 Apr 2017 13:27

shiv wrote:Hey guys - don't self flagellate. Remember that on Twitter and on other fora Pakis. Chinese and others are saying exactly that sort of critical stuff about India. .....


Who needs Chinese when your own can do it

.excellent piece by @mihirssharma on India's bungled Aircraft Carrier "strategy" https://t.co/JlDiLpQ6Ef

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 25 Apr 2017 13:30

Yes,confusing at times,when the P-17s are considered FFGs while the Rajputs/Kashins are DDGs with lesser dpl! In general,frigates are supposed to b the fleet's workhorses where ASW is concerned,while destroyers carry a heavy load of anti-ship missiles and SAMs for fleet defence. With greater automation and miniaturisation of components,warships of lesser tonnage have equiv or greater weaponry than their predecessors. This is why corvettes are becoming the warship of choice for most navies which cannot afford larger capital ships. IN warships generally have heavier manning.There was some explanation for this some time ago.

Coming back to the IN and flat tops. I think we've missed the boat,pun intended,with the specs for the 4 LPDs. Together they make up a total of 80-100,000 t. This could've been easily distributed amongst 3 larger LPHDs of around 30-35K t each. almost the size of IAC-1. Crews would be smaller ,plus they would have larger flight decks and be able to operate as light carriers as well, for both ASW,fleet air defence and strike. The Viraat could carry 30 aircraft/helos ,these much larger vessels would be able to do the same,switching the mix of air assets depending upon the operation required,amphibious or otherwise. Spain and OZ-building similar Juan Carlos flat tops ,with ski-jumps ,will be abl;e to operate sev. ypes of helos and aircraft. SAAB a few years ago even had a Sea Gripen proposal for the Viraat!

The basic flight deck of these amphibs could've been taken from that of the IAC-1,so that similar aircraft could operate from both types. These extra 3 flat tops would when required act as light carriers giving the In a total of at least 5-6 to handle multiple crises whose geographic locations are afar .
In the absence of an Indian Marine Corps,something that I've been saying we need for years, one wonders where these specialist smaller amphib vessels will be used .

Funds would still be there for sister ship to the Vikrant-II.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 26 Apr 2017 10:20

Typical Chinese posturing and provoking.We should simply ignore it and get on with our priorities.Perhaps the Chinese want us to compete in carriers and beggar ourselves in the process! Anyway,they fondly imagine that they can in a jiffy take on the US which has a century of carrier air power ops behind it. The planned 6 Chinese carriers would be wonderful targets for its enemies and Indian N-subs. China is behaving exactly the same way that the Pakis did in '65 and '71."One Paki is equal to 10 Indians...blah,blah." When their carriers get a few BMos missiles down their throats and torpedoes up their bilges,it will be fun to watch them scuttle away in fright like crabs behind the Great Wall! The sinking of just one capital ship of the PLAN will cause such consternation in the PRC and erode it of self-confidence ,reducing it to comic hysteria.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-new ... 4dd7K.html
China to unveil aircraft carrier as media takes dig at India's naval power
WORLD Updated: Apr 24, 2017 18:24 IST

Sutirtho Patranobis
Hindustan Times, Beijing
China military power
Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) navy soldiers stand on a decommissioned destroyer in an aircraft carrier theme park during a celebration event on China's Navy Day in Tianjin on April 23, 2017. (Reuters)
Against the backdrop of reports that China’s first domestically built aircraft carrier will be unveiled soon, state media on Monday took a dig at India by saying its first home-grown carrier isn’t even operational and that New Delhi should keep its military ambitions in check.

Reports in the Chinese media said the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy was making “final preparations” to launch its first domestically built aircraft carrier to mark the 68th anniversary of the founding of the maritime force, which was on Sunday.

“The scaffolding around the ship, temporarily named the Type 001A, was removed and the deck was cleared,” Shanghai-based news portal thepaper.cn reported, indicating the unveiling is likely to be done soon though it could not happen on Sunday because of low tides.

Reports said it took China about five years to make its own aircraft carrier that it will be inducted into the navy by 2020.

State media took the opportunity to make a few points about the naval capabilities of China and India.

In a piece with the headline “India needs to learn that economic development comes before a naval buildup”, the nationalistic Global Times tabloid said: “Aircraft carriers are seen as symbols of a nation's military might, but the construction of them consumes huge amounts of resources, thus requiring developing countries to learn how to keep their military ambitions in check.”

China had no aircraft carrier till 2012 while India’s first was purchased from Britain in the late 1950s. China’s pursuit of military development has been in “sync” with its overall economic development, the article said. It added China’s priority was developing its economy and then building “resource consuming” aircraft carriers.

“India itself could be taken as a negative example for a buildup of aircraft carriers...New Delhi is perhaps too impatient to develop an aircraft carrier. The country is still in its initial stages of industrialisation and there will be many obstacles that stand in the way of a buildup of aircraft carriers,” the article said.

China would have finished work on an indigenous carrier “several years ago if Beijing had simply wanted to engage in an arms race to have more influence in the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean regions”, it added.

Meanwhile, Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post said China’s new aircraft carrier has a displacement of 70,000 tonnes, is 315 metres long, 75 metres wide and has a cruising speed of 31 knots.

“It is slightly larger than the Liaoning, China’s first aircraft ­carrier, which was refurbished from the semi-completed Soviet carrier Varyag, which Beijing bought from a Ukrainian shipyard in 1998,” the report said.

The new carrier has a larger hangar to carry more J-15 fighters and more space on deck for helicopters and other aircraft.

State media has reported China plans to have six aircraft carriers, and the second one to be built domestically is being constructed in Shanghai.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 26 Apr 2017 10:57

Another piece on the same issue.However,there is no need to panic or take knee-jerk decisions which will haunt us in later years.The current dispensation is tackling the decade long dereliction of duty by AKA and the UPA-regimes in gravely compromising national security by sheer indifference. Let's address the problem cooly.

Carriers: IAC-1 is delayed,main problem seems to be lack of funds in timely fashion to finish the job.MIG-29K problems,can and must be fixed,Russia's responsibility. Any defective eqpt/aircraft must be replaced by Russia.A sister ship to the Vikrant must be preferred to a large budget-eating behemoth.This will be cheaper,more economical to operate and be built in a much faster time. 3 med. sized carriers wil suffice for us until 2030,as a strong complement of land-based LRMP/strike aircraft equipped with advanced ASW weaponry and anti-ship missiles will be able to take the battle into the enemy's pond preventing him from entering the IOR!

Subs: For immediate needs,further leases of both conventional and N-subs from Russia. Since the SDcorpene desing has bene comnpromised and are hugely expensive,negotiate with germany for a new line of U-boats to complement and replace existing U-209s.
Accelerate the indigenously built 6 SSNs. Until they arrive we need sev. SSGNs,preferably a few more Akulas for ease of operations,etc.Yasen tech should be incorporated on the new SSNs.

http://www.defencenews.in/article/With- ... ean-251766
With China's 2nd Aircraft Carrier, it will now be very difficult for India to keep China out of the Indian Ocean
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
By: ET
The launch of China’s second aircraft carrier, expected as soon as this week, will be an important and depressing moment for India.

The “Type 001A” -- likely to be named the “Shandong” -- will give China an edge for the first time in the carrier race with its Asian rival, a literal two-to-one advantage. After decommissioning the INS Viraat earlier this year, the Indian Navy is down to a single carrier, INS Vikramaditya. Worse, the Shandong has been built at China’s own giant shipyard at Dalian; Vikramaditya is merely a repurposed 1980s-era Russian carrier formerly known as the Admiral Gorshkov.

Even more telling than the raw numbers is what China’s progress says about India’s ability to provide security in its own backyard. Chinese naval strategists have open designs on the Indian Ocean: According to one, “China needs two carrier strike groups in the West Pacific Ocean and two in the Indian Ocean.”

The government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has talked a great deal about revitalizing the Indian military; it’s opened the defense sector up to greater foreign investment and is building a much-closer relationship with the US military, largely with China in mind. But spending has lagged. Worse, successive governments simply don’t seem to have thought through where best to direct those scarce resources.

For its part, the Indian Navy has gone all-in on a strategy that emphasizes carrier battle groups. The idea is that India must dominate the ocean that bears its name and needs carriers in order to project power well beyond its shores. As a result, it wasted far too much time and treasure on the Admiral Gorshkov, which arrived from Russia six years late and at three times the cost that had initially been promised.

Its efforts to develop a homegrown carrier have been even more misbegotten. The Navy plans to name, commission and float the INS Vikrant next year. At that point, the ship reportedly won’t have its aviation complex in place, or even anti-aircraft missiles. The Navy has puzzlingly refused to buy India’s indigenous light fighter, the Tejas, saying it’s too heavy. Meanwhile, the MiG-29s being used instead are enormously troubled, according to India’s government auditor; more than 60 percent of their engines were withdrawn from service or rejected in just four years. The Vikrant will only be properly combat-ready by 2023 -- eight years behind schedule.

No one would expect India to match China’s defense spending head-to-head. China’s economy is four times the size of India’s; not surprisingly, its defense budget is at least three times larger. But the People’s Republic faces a parallel dilemma when confronting the US, whose military budget is about three times as big as China’s.

China has approached this disparity with a much clearer strategy in mind, as well as a far more rational evaluation of its relative strength. Rather than focusing on matching America’s carrier fleet, China first emphasized asymmetric weaponry such as ballistic missiles and submarines, a reflection of the Soviets’ successful Cold War strategy. Only now -- as its interests and capabilities have grown -- is it pouring resources into developing carrier groups.

By contrast, India’s carrier-first strategy has drained the Navy of resources and left it with just 13 conventional submarines in service. Eleven of those are more than a quarter-century old. The two new ones, amazingly, were commissioned and sent out to wander the deep sea without their main armament, torpedoes. Nor has India tried to counter China’s numerical superiority -- 70 to 15 -- in terms of submarines with specialized anti-submarine weaponry, including helicopters. The Indian fleet has less than 30 superannuated medium-sized anti-sub helicopters, the first of which was bought in 1971.

India’s problem isn’t ultimately a shortage of money; it’s a lack of forethought and political courage. Carriers are big and showy, and bolster national pride; diesel submarines don’t, or at least not to the same degree. A more rational strategy for India -- and its peers in Asia and the Pacific Rim who fear China’s growing military might -- would ensure that India’s submarine fleet and its anti-submarine armaments are capable enough on their own to deter attempts to control the Indian Ocean, while closer ties with other navies fill in the gaps.

That would require a clear-eyed appraisal of India’s defense and economic capabilities and requirements -- a problem when India doesn’t have an outline of its strategy on the lines of American or Chinese white papers, nor even a full-time defense minister. The Navy is fortunately starting to train more closely with the U.S. and other partners such as Japan, which should increase its effectiveness. But until it thinks harder about where its money should go, it’s going to have a tricky time keeping China out of its backyard.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 26 Apr 2017 11:03

What a stupid headline. As if we have been doing something to keep the Chinese out of the Indian ocean until now and a new carrier will suddenly change that.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 27 Apr 2017 13:15

Here is a sober assessment from the US on China's second flat top. Could prove to be a "financial train wreck"
The IN should take a hard look at the PLAN's carrier ambitions and its own too. Carriers and their accompanying air arm,plus escorts,cost a fortune to acquire and operate,let alone the time taken to build the flat top,at least 10 years for even med. sized one by Indian building standards. The cost involved will be anywhere upwards of $10-12B for the CV alone. As given details earlier,we could possess 15-20 conventional AIP subs or a mix of nuclear and AIP boats,giving us at least 4 SSNs,plus 10-12+AIP subs. No prizes for determining which of the two options gives the In more bang for the buck and will be better poised to counter the PLAN and PN together. Ultimately,the carrier can be in only place at the same time and its aircraft too have combat radius restrictions based upon their payload and time on station/mission. The vulnerability of the carrier in comparison with subs is too well known to repeat here,except to say that any aspiring major naval power like India,with global ambitions,must possess a balanced navy. Right now,there is a gaping hole in the sub arena which requires massive finacial outlays and immediate decisions,for solutions to meet short,med and long term requirements and to re-evaluate the IN's naval requirements upto 2050.

https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl= ... =en&geo=US
China’s Future Aircraft Carrier Force Could Be a Financial Train Wreck
Resources poured into aircraft carriers are a massive budgetary burden

China's homegrown aircraft carrier is transferred from the dry dock into the water during a launch ceremony at Dalian shipyardChina's homegrown aircraft carrier is transferred from the dry dock into the water during a launch ceremony at Dalian shipyard / Getty Images

BY: Reuben F. Johnson
April 26, 2017 4:00 pm

SINGAPORE—China's launch of its first homegrown aircraft carrier on Wednesday could be the beginning of a financial train wreck, according to carrier design and construction specialists.

Unless seriously revised, China's plans for its future carrier force could become a major financial difficulty for the country. The resources poured into aircraft carriers are a massive budgetary burden, even in the United States, according to Andrew Marshall, former director of the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment.

China's first "indigenous" aircraft carrier, assigned the hull number of CV-17, is expected to be named the Shandong and will be slightly larger at 70,000 tons than the CV-16, China's first-ever aircraft carrier.

The CV-17, characterized by the Chinese as a "homegrown" design, is an upgraded version of the Liaoning. The Soviet-built Liaoning, however, was not developed either in China or with China's naval requirements in mind. Ukraine sold the unfinished ship in 1998 to Chinese middlemen "pretending to have no connection to the navy," according to one China military analyst in Washington. "This was done under the ridiculous pretense that the carrier would be tied up at the docks in Macau to become a floating casino painted in battleship grey." :rotfl:

The ship was eventually towed to the Dalian shipyards, where it underwent more than a decade of re-fitting as the People's Liberation Army Navy worked to develop aircraft for carrier-based use.

This new carrier will be "just enough different from the Liaoning that the PLAN will enjoy minimal benefits—if any—and no synergism from having two similarly-designed ships," according to a U.S. aircraft carrier design specialist who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon. The troubles that the Chinese will have with their carrier fleet "are only going to multiply geometrically if they follow through on their previously declared plans for future ships."

The PLAN is expected to launch a second carrier in 2021 that will be equipped with a steam catapult similar to that of the U.S. Navy's current fleet of carriers. A subsequent program for a third series of carrier calls for ships to be fitted with an electromagnetic catapult—like that of the U.S. Navy's incoming Gerald Ford-class ships—and to be powered with a nuclear reactor.

Operating a fleet of ships of widely disparate and dissimilar designs "is not the way anyone trying to develop an effective carrier force would do it," said the carrier design specialist. "This could turn out to be logistics nightmare of significant proportions." *(Indian Navy are you listening?)

A retired U.S. Government naval specialist said the cost of supporting naval vessels would be huge.

"It is a ever-expanding drain on resources that will not become clear to the Chinese until it is too late for them to reverse it," he said. "When you look at the potential of what this could do to the PLAN's future budgets—as well as the other programs that will have to be sacrificed to keep the carriers afloat—it is easy to see why people like [Andrew] Marshall are more sage and less alarmist about the ‘coming Chinese carrier threat.'"

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 656
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Manish_P » 27 Apr 2017 15:31

Philip sir - can you please move your posts on the chinese carrier to the China Military watch thread.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1141
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 27 Apr 2017 18:54

arshyam wrote:
chola wrote:@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.
chola wrote: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.

When you are projecting this power around the IOR, do the "projectees" care about whether it is nuke propelled or not? 65K will give us a decent sized carrier, but having observed China they are going to imitate the khan and build a bunch of 95K ton carriers going forward. At that point, will you want us to build such behemoths just to impress our neighbours? Where does it end?

Let's build to our own needs; and first try to quantify what those needs are. If we want a nuke carrier to simply strut around the IOR, what are the advantages that brings as compared to a conventional one? How big do the accompanying destroyers and frigates need to be? How much range and speed should they all have? Do we have enough n-subs to keep up with such a carrier group? The diesels with their piddly <5kn under battery won't cut it (surely they can't snorkel and accompany a carrier).



Our needs include creating the workforce and infrastructure needed to sustain carrier aviation in which we have already invested decades.

A 65K-ton CVN is a goal which can gain us a technical and industrial base especially now since Unkil, in this rare time of needing to balance the PRC, has opened the locks to EMALS and AAG as well as a century of carrier development.

We have spent much treasure building far less advance ships through Rus, let's not go cheap when this once in a geo-political lifetime opportunity presents itself with the US.

Not building the CVN will not suddenly mean we will get 10 more SSK/SSN. They will go through their own travails as is our wont.

We need at least one CATOBAR to bridge our state today to the day our economy can afford CBGs in earnest. Otherwise we end up like the Brits who lost their fixed wing capabity for a generation.

Give the admirals what they want. They know what they are doing. These are not spendthrift people. They have historically made do with the cheapest and meanest of budgets compared to their sister services.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 29 Apr 2017 18:19

Weekend read

Kulshrestha, S, Guhathakurta, R “ANALYSIS | Proactive Defense Infrastructure Planning of Indian Island Territories – A Conceptual Case Study of Lakshadweep (Minicoy and Suheri Pal Islands)” IndraStra Global 002, no. 04 (2015):


Image

https://skulshrestha.net/2016/04/18/pro ... r-islands/

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 343
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby malushahi » 29 Apr 2017 20:00

Aditya G wrote:Weekend read


thanks aditya. indeed a good read.

i have always struggled to understand why they do not have jetties by the dozen on these islands. while there may have been reasons for hesitancy in the pre-2001 era, why is there more of the same with changed perceptions, and sundry guests piling through of late?

these islands sit atop an "embankment" extending southwards that has only so many gaps through it. a high tempo flotilla of cheap brown-water boats, carrying integral choppers (all mii), will magically raise situational awareness and peace in the region manifold. it would be the biggest bang for navy's stretched buck in the short to medium term.

at the very least it will help take off the pressure on sub-fleet in the immediate future, while augmenting signature libraries.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 29 Apr 2017 21:33

Some good news wrt ship building

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/n ... 855712.ece

The Pipavav shipyard in Gujarat, owned by the Reliance group headed by Anil Ambani, has emerged as the most important private shipyard for the Indian military in recent times. The shipyard, however, has not been able to meet deadlines, adversely affecting the operational capabilities of the Navy, naval sources say.

The Navy told The Hindu that it would impose penalties on the shipyard if there were delays in delivery of ships and other contract works.

Fresh impetus

Reliance Defence and Engineering Ltd. (RDEL), which took over Pipavav in early 2016, insists that the shipyard has pulled up after the new management took over and that it is confident of delivering on time.

The shipyard is now engaged in the construction of five naval offshore patrol vessels (NOPV) and maintenance of at least two other naval ships and is bidding for several major contracts. Its engagement with the military significantly outweighs work by any other private Indian shipyard.

In response to a detailed questionnaire, the Navy said there had been a 65% progress on the first two NOPVs and 30% on the other three NOPVs as on February 16. However, this is after a delay of more than two years.

The original contract for the NOPVs was signed in 2011, with the first boat to be delivered by early 2015. According to fresh revised timeline provided to The Hindu by the Navy, the first two NPOVs are scheduled to be launched by May 2017 and delivered by October and December 2017.

The remaining three are expected by November 2017 and delivered by April, June and August 2018.

Despite speculation in the past few years about the possibility of the Navy imposing a financial penalty on the shipyard, there has been no such decision yet.

Faster execution
A Reliance official told The Hindu that the firm had accelerated work since the RDEL took over.

“It’s a contractual issue. All these damages are based on discussions ... there is a standard procedure. They know what we have done and how much we have done and then we will deal with whatever it is,” he said about the penalty clause.

He stressed that when RDEL took over Pipavav, only 15% of the work was completed on the first two NOPVs, and work had not commenced on the remaining three.

The ₹2,500 crore project for five NOPVs, each weighing 2000 tonnes, was awarded in 2011, but never really took off as the Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering ran into a debt trap.

Pipavav is also undertaking the refit of the fleet replenishment tanker INS Deepak and survey ship INS Jamuna. The Navy stated that the normal refit has been delayed for “various reasons” and is likely to be completed by April 2017. Penalty clauses of the contract like “liquidated damages and consequential damages would be invoked in accordance with provisions of DPM-09 post completion of the refit.”

The RDEL, official, however said the contract was awarded in August 2015 and the delay was “due to significant change in the scope of the work which was done as an amendment to the contract.” He explained that when a ship goes for refit, there is a broad scope of work specified. But when it is opened up, there may be additional work required.

RDEL has already informed the Navy that the company has completed its part of the work and the ship is ready for sea trial, he said.

On the refit on INS Deepak, the Navy said the contract for refit “was awarded to RDEL on competitive basis since it emerged as L1 bidder” in June 2016.

Some Navy sources had indicated that the refit has been delayed, affecting the operational preparedness of the Navy. Mumbai-based western fleet has only one tanker, INS Deepak. However, the Navy said the scope of refit of the ship, which is now at the Mumbai Port Trust, has not been truncated.

RDEL said work began in September last year and is expected to be completed by April 30.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Gagan » 01 May 2017 17:52

Right now, sensors and weapons are the main (apart from engines, propellers) are the major imported and very expensive components of the Navy's ships.

Can DRDO launch a programe to successively replace all these, starting from the simplest - tubed artillery (L&T RBU-6000 version), artillery guns, CIWS, SAMs, SSM, AShMs, and LACMs. I note that Chaff, Torpedos are indiginized on the surface ships.

An approach to Make In India, the most expensive parts of the navy's ships must be undertaken. India needs a standard VLS system and indian missiles.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3422
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby srai » 01 May 2017 20:20

Aditya G wrote:...
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/n ... 855712.ece

...
Some Navy sources had indicated that the refit has been delayed, affecting the operational preparedness of the Navy. Mumbai-based western fleet has only one tanker, INS Deepak.

...


More Fleet Support Ships are needed.

JTull
BRFite
Posts: 1979
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JTull » 01 May 2017 20:26

Apparently, SoKo deal with HSL is for upgrading infrastructure to build 5 of those fleet support ships.

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

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Bheeshma » 01 May 2017 20:28

What about the Aditya, Jyothi and Shakti??

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18962
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 03 May 2017 10:19

Air Defence trials on Adv Talwar class frigate , VLS Shtil-1 can be seen in Action , Report are that VLS shtil-1 has ARH seeker

https://youtu.be/nWWbMmzLcpY

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2585710.html

missile firing of the Shtil-1 anti-aircraft missile system passing State tests in the Baltic Sea of ​​the third built for the Russian Navy frigate modified project 11356 Admiral Makarov. A simultaneous launch of four anti-aircraft guided missiles (9M317M or 9M317MA) was made.

suryag
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2878
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Dihilipscussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby suryag » 03 May 2017 11:43

^^^ Thanks Philip-lite sir, all Russian weapons work like "ad commercials seen on TV"


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ashthor, prasan, Prem Kumar, Thakur_B and 47 guests