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.
Locked
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

"Build that carrier quick!".Well,that other "carrier",IAC-1 is officially 9 yrs behind schedule,when first conceived,etc.By the time it is completed,completes sea trials,etc.,2020 would've arrived. I suggest that we instead start equipping the 3rd carrier,built millions of years ago,"INS India",with the requisite LR naval strike aircraft like TU-22M3 Backfires,etc. The aircraft are available in plenty,were offered to the IAF decades ago too! Had we said yes then,we would've probably started our own stealth bomber programe by now to replace them.

4 amphibs of 30K+ t are being planned.Innovative deck,lifts and hangar design could see these 4 vessels capable of at least the NLCA of STOVL aircraft like the JSF or Yak-!141 successor (to be developed by Ru for their future carriers) in the future. These 4 vessels could support the two ski-jump CVs we will possess,until funds are available for a new class of larger carriers depending upon naval carrier/UCAV developments post 2020.In the meantime,the top priority for the IN must be N-subs,AIP subs,ASW/MR helos and LR naval strike aircraft in that order. The grandiose carrier ambitions of the IN should be put firmly on the shelf until the country can afford it and who knows as said before,what future developments will affect the design,size and air complement of carriers.

Replacement of surface warships appear to be on course apart from some delays in some programes.
The deal for 4 extra Talwars/Adm.Grig. should go through shortly with the engine suppliers sorted out.Equipping these FFGs with Kalibir/BMos missiles and VLS modules for LR/MR SAMs essential.This class is going to be the workhorse of the In for the next decade.The number to be built in India could increase to at least 4,which would give us a total of 12. Given the cost of larger warships,the cost of the improved P-28s should be evaluated with a new smaller multi-role corvette class which could be built swiftly and at low cost.This is where the pvt. yards could also benefit having been tasked with building patrol craft,OPVs,etc. for the IN and CG.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Singha »

>> I suggest that we instead start equipping the 3rd carrier,built millions of years ago,"INS India",with the requisite LR naval strike aircraft like TU-22M3 Backfires,etc

:rotfl: touche sir. touche.

run up the battle flag on the mainmast, turn into the wind, accelerate to 30 knots and launch full deckloads!! no EMALS thing needed.

with 0 carriers, but a good fleet of naval strike bombers fielding the crude AS6 kingfish and AS3 kitchen, and some initially noisy SSNs , soviet union put the fear of god into anyone in the north atlantic and near japan. being attacked by a few squadrons of backfires with 3*heavy ASMs, guided by Bear-J strike leads and supported by Granit salvos from lurking Oscar subs was a deeply religious experience even in gameplay i feel.

we need to break out of the stockholm syndrome of the light carrier "1971 vikrant complex" - its dead, its done . time to move on. no disrespect to the crew and brave flyers of the alize and seahawk , it was one of our finest hours but the paradigms have changed.

by 2025 , hypersonic weapons will start to proliferate. either be a big daddy like CVBG with layers and layers of defences upto space based assets or lie low under the sea / fly fast in the air, strike and then leave. anyone who loiters without uber protection will get slaughtered.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by chola »

ShauryaT wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Defence ministry blocks Navy’s ‘unrealistic’ five-year acquisition plan
https://theprint.in/2017/09/13/defence- ... tion-plan/
Another plan, to build a new aircraft carrier named Vishal, has also been moved again. This plan had been nixed by previous defence minister Manohar Parrikar last year, because it had been deemed too expensive. The project is estimated to cost a whopping Rs 1.35 lakh crore at the approval stage, a projection that is likely to go up with time.
These numbers can possibly not be true?

HOLY CRAP!!! Okay, I'm a big supporter of the IN's push for the 65K tonner (and have dreamed of an Indian CATOBAR since I visited the USS Kennedy.) But not at that price! Probably included nuke and EMALS. Cheaper with conventional and steam cats I imagine.

I wouldn't blame the admirals they see a set of challenges and formulate a plan to deal with it. One of the challenges is matching Cheen's carrier program. Well, we lost the carrier race to the chinis for sure but at those numbers it can't be helped.

Singhaji is right, with hypersonics carriers are sitting ducks during real warfare with peer powers. But during peacetime or bullying of small states, the optics of a carrier force is unmatched.
Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Chinmay »

ShauryaT wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Defence ministry blocks Navy’s ‘unrealistic’ five-year acquisition plan
https://theprint.in/2017/09/13/defence- ... tion-plan/
Another plan, to build a new aircraft carrier named Vishal, has also been moved again. This plan had been nixed by previous defence minister Manohar Parrikar last year, because it had been deemed too expensive. The project is estimated to cost a whopping Rs 1.35 lakh crore at the approval stage, a projection that is likely to go up with time.
These numbers can possibly not be true?
There is something very wrong with that price. More than 20 billion USD, for a carrier? Thats more than the new Ford class, including R&D costs.
Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Karthik S »

That $20B might include the planes, helos etc.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Austin »

Admirals need to get their priorities right when they dont have Bread to eat they ask for Cake.

Bread Butter program like new MCVC ( Ocean and Litorral ) , New Gen Corvette , Frigate and Destroyers ,Indiginous SSK/SSN , LPD class ships would be more useful in ASW warfare and sea land operation if CSL can build it after Vikrant , Working with HAL to build a 12T Heavy Chopper instead of importing 100s from Videsh , Inducting Dhruv in large numbers , Litorral Patrol ship of 1000 T class there are dozen such bread and butter program that would need more attention from Navy instead of spending $20 billion on Aircraft Carrier which even they know wont pass the muster of FM
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by srin »

@singha and @philip: neither Tu160 or Tu22 with their low production runs and potential spare parts issues. Convert a 747 to a cruise missile carrier (like this). With 72 cruise missiles per aircraft, with just a few aircraft, you can outnumber the enemy fleet's SAMs. And spares will be abundant.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by chola »

Rakesh wrote:India soon to sign to purchase of two frigates of 11356 project from Russia
http://citytoday.news/india-soon-to-sig ... es-supply/
So I'm interested in the logistics of this.

So we get these empty hulls in the Baltic at Kaliningrad. Do we hire tugs to pull them all the way through North Sea, the English Channel, around the Iberian Peninsula, through the Straits of Gibraltar, across the Mediterranean, through the Dardanelles and Bosporous Straits, into the Black Sea and finally to the Ukraine where they can be fitted with their engines?

The towing vessels and crew can be Russian? Or third party since Ukraine not happy Rus is biting off chunks of eastern Ukraine? I assume IN would have personnel on scene.

How long would this take, including installation and long trip to India? Why did we buy frigates with no engines?
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Kakarat »

From what I understand we get two built at russian yard and two more built from scratch in Goa
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by SSridhar »

INS Aridhaman to be out soon. Here’s what you need to know about nuclear submarines - Issac James Manayath, New Indian Express
CHENNAI: Later this month, defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman will launch India’s second indigenous nuclear submarine, INS Aridhaman. Following its launch, the new vessel will undergo sea trials and will be inducted into service no later than 2019.

A nuclear sub is something only a few countries can boast of. In fact, the induction of INS Arihant into service in 2016 made India the only country apart from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council to operate a homemade nuclear U-boat.

INS Aridhaman will carry twice as many missiles as INS Arihant besides travelling faster under water. It is fitted with eight launch tubes unlike its elder sister Arihant, which has only four. Further, experts say the new sub will carry K-15 and (the newer) K-4 ballistic missiles as does INS Arihant. K-4 is an intermediate range ballistic missile that can hit targets as far as 3500 km.

Aridhaman’s launch comes at a time of growing tensions in the Indian Ocean region. Analysts say there has been a spike in the Chinese naval presence in the Indian Ocean. Just days after India objected to China’s construction of a road on the Doklam plateau, India Today reported that a Chinese submarine surfaced in the Indian Ocean waters. Although the timing is interesting, it would be a mistake to ignore the larger picture. For quite some time now, China has been ratcheting up its presence in the region. Abhijit Singh, a former naval officer who heads the Maritime Policy Initiative at the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation, said, “Since January this year, China has been able to establish a strong military and economic presence in the Indian Ocean region, with many South Asian states bending over backwards to accommodate Beijing’s regional initiatives.”

Strategic experts warn that China would use its superior naval might to choke India in the Indian Ocean in the event of a conflict. China’s growing trade with countries in Africa and West Asia means that maintaining access to the Indian Ocean is a priority for Beijing. However, there is always a possibility that India and the US, which maintains a significant presence in the Indian Ocean, may see this Chinese naval activity as a threat to their own interests.

Further, the launch of INS Aridhaman comes just months after China announced the start of the sea trials of its first domestically built aircraft carrier. Locked in competition, New Delhi sees no option but to boost its own capability. One way of doing so is by building its own nuclear sub.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Singha »

Ships without ukraine engines can be carted either to nikolayev ukraine or india in special ships that carry other ships and submarines. Uss cole went back home on one such

These ships were built for zorya engines before the donetsk thing erupted so russi navy cannot use them without mods but we have good relation with ukraine so we are doing the russis a favour by buying these assets
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by ShauryaT »

Austin wrote:Admirals need to get their priorities right when they dont have Bread to eat they ask for Cake.

Bread Butter program like new MCVC ( Ocean and Litorral ) , New Gen Corvette , Frigate and Destroyers ,Indiginous SSK/SSN , LPD class ships would be more useful in ASW warfare and sea land operation if CSL can build it after Vikrant , Working with HAL to build a 12T Heavy Chopper instead of importing 100s from Videsh , Inducting Dhruv in large numbers , Litorral Patrol ship of 1000 T class there are dozen such bread and butter program that would need more attention from Navy instead of spending $20 billion on Aircraft Carrier which even they know wont pass the muster of FM
I have solution to all these shenanigans. Do a nuclear test. There will be no choice but to go indigenous.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by chola »

Singha wrote:Ships without ukraine engines can be carted either to nikolayev ukraine or india in special ships that carry other ships and submarines. Uss cole went back home on one such

These ships were built for zorya engines before the donetsk thing erupted so russi navy cannot use them without mods but we have good relation with ukraine so we are doing the russis a favour by buying these assets

Oh right, the half submersibles! Totally forgotten about them. I see "Russian ship" and I associate "tug" with it for some reason.

We did the Russkies a favor alright. Logistically, it sounds like a general PITA.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12196
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Pratyush »

Singha wrote:Ships without ukraine engines can be carted either to nikolayev ukraine or india in special ships that carry other ships and submarines. Uss cole went back home on one such

These ships were built for zorya engines before the donetsk thing erupted so russi navy cannot use them without mods but we have good relation with ukraine so we are doing the russis a favour by buying these assets
Russians have developed own engines for these ships. So not to worry on the account of engine's.
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Prasad »

So 8 tubes on the Aridaman. That is a big jump. Do we expect 8x3 K-15s?
Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Karthik S »

8 K-4 please, with K-15, it will remain a littoral SSBN.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Singha »

>>INS Aridhaman will carry twice as many missiles as INS Arihant besides travelling faster under water

hope this nugget is true
Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Karthik S »

Singha wrote:>>INS Aridhaman will carry twice as many missiles as INS Arihant besides travelling faster under water

hope this nugget is true
Isn't speed of SSBN secondary to stealth, which has inverse relationship with speed?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Singha »

well speed is essential it needs to deploy far out or get away from enemy shipping. any tailing SSKs can be left behind in the dust with a sustained 25knot sprint.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Austin »

For those asking for Backfire , Video of Tu-22M3 in Action in recent Syrian conflict

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_oBel-Hdi4
bhavani
BRFite
Posts: 453
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by bhavani »

chola wrote:
Singha wrote:Ships without ukraine engines can be carted either to nikolayev ukraine or india in special ships that carry other ships and submarines. Uss cole went back home on one such

These ships were built for zorya engines before the donetsk thing erupted so russi navy cannot use them without mods but we have good relation with ukraine so we are doing the russis a favour by buying these assets

Oh right, the half submersibles! Totally forgotten about them. I see "Russian ship" and I associate "tug" with it for some reason.

We did the Russkies a favor alright. Logistically, it sounds like a general PITA.
I hope that these ships dont have those stupid Single Arm lSAM launchers any more. We have a lot of these ships with these Arm launchers
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Hyundai-HSL to build first of five fleet support ships
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 679125.ece
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by chola »

bhavani wrote:
chola wrote:

Oh right, the half submersibles! Totally forgotten about them. I see "Russian ship" and I associate "tug" with it for some reason.

We did the Russkies a favor alright. Logistically, it sounds like a general PITA.
I hope that these ships dont have those stupid Single Arm lSAM launchers any more. We have a lot of these ships with these Arm launchers
I would hope these ships have VLS Shtil like the Grigorovich but 11356 in the article is the export project number of the older Gorschov -- which has Mr. One-Arm.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

Faced with the Sino-Pak JV,particularly the threat from the huge no. of subs which will be thrown at us,finally subs have taken top priority it appears in the hallowed corridors of power in the capital. What is noteworthy is the revelation that a 3rd. Akula is on the cards,which we on BRF habe been advising for for a v.long time. A fleet of proven,upgraded Akula SSGNs, along with our desi SSBNs and SSNs to come will br agreat asset in taking battle to the PLAN even in the ICS and Pacific waters.However,mumbers do matter and we also need a alrge no. of smaller conventional/AIP subs which can be built and acquired quickly and at low cost. Here are some reports on the same issue.

http://www.news18.com/news/india/opinio ... 18033.html
OPINION | India to Pour $15 Billion in Submarine-Building and Lease Nuclear Submarine from Russia, But China Still Far Ahead
The reasons of India being far behind China in terms of submarine fleet despite its China-specific endeavour, is not far to seek. India has 15 submarines operational, including two nuclear subs, in contrast to China’s 70 operational submarines.
Rajeev Sharma |
Updated:September 14, 2017,

India is trying its hardest to play catch-up with China in the field of submarines, particularly nuclear submarines.

New Delhi is going to spend $15 billion with the objective of significantly augmenting its fleet of submarines by the targeted year 2023-24, a very stiff target indeed because of (a) the involvement of foreign vendors and (b) because of India’s own very notorious red tape.

And as I argued about the Indo-Russian strategic ties having been rebooted

Russia is set to play a pivotal role in the context of India’s quest for submarines too. Russia has already been roped in to lease out a nuclear submarine — third one for India.

India is going to acquire its third nuclear submarine on lease from Russia for 10 years at a cost of $2.5 billion. Russia will take six years for delivering it to India.

Therefore,in my opinion,the twp mo

Besides, India is on the cusp of launching its second nuclear submarine in two or three weeks which is likely to be operational in 2019. Over and above this, India is working on a $12 billion project for constructing six nuclear-powered submarines with conventional warheads under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Make in India programme.

But all of this put together may prove to be far too inadequate, even if presuming that all the above-mentioned projects are completed on time, something that has never happened. Read on!

Consider the following measures that India is taking to beef up its submarine power.

— India's second indigenous nuclear submarine will be launched in two or three weeks and will be fully operational by 2019. In Navy’s parlance launching of a boat refers to the process of transferring the vessel to the water from a dry dock. Once launched, the boat will undergo extensive sea trials before it is commissioned. The launch is likely to be done by Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in keeping with the tradition that a boat is launched by a woman – much like the first indigenous nuclear submarine, INS Arihant, which was launched in 2009 by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's wife, Gursharan Kaur.

— India’s only operational nuclear submarine INS Arihant was commissioned in the Indian Navy in August 2016 — a proud moment which made India the first country outside the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to have indigenously built a nuclear submarine.

— Russia will lease out a nuclear submarine to India for ten years after retrofitting it. The to-be-leased submarine will be stripped down to the hull and then rebuilt in the presence of Indian shipbuilding team at Russian shipyard Severodvinsk to witness the complex refitting and modernization process of nuclear attack submarines.

— It will take six years for Russia to hand over the retrofitted submarine to India. However, the Russian track record in meeting its deadlines has been abysmal and a delay of one or two years, if not more, should be factored in. The new boat will be named INS Chakra-III.

— The total cost of Russia’s third nuclear submarine lease to India in with retrofitting is pegged at $2.5 billion and Indians have told the Russians to deliver the boat within the agreed timeline and the cost. If India had gone for a completely new nuclear submarine it would have cost the double and pushed the deadline to almost a decade. Indian viewpoint is that considering the current geopolitics, it made more sense to have the nuclear submarine retrofitted and also keep the cost down.

— However, the presence of Indian shipbuilding team at the Severodvinsk yard to witness and assist in the refitting and modernization of the third nuclear submarine India intends to lease from Russia is not a done deal yet and negotiations are still under way. If the negotiations are successful, as is the optimism in New Delhi, the Indian shipbuilders would get the vital experience which would hold them in good stead as they are being tasked with the responsibility of constructing at least six nuclear-powered submarines in India at an estimated cost of over $12 billion. India has contacted six foreign shipyards in Russia, France, Japan and Germany with a formal request for information about building six non-nuclear submarines equipped with air-independent-propulsion systems.

The reasons of India being far behind China in terms of submarine fleet despite its China-specific endeavour, is not far to seek. India has 15 submarines operational, including two nuclear subs, in contrast to China’s 70 operational submarines.

Moreover, the current gap between Indian and Chinese submarine strength is only going to increase further as China has built a nuclear submarine mass production superfactory at Bohai Shipyard which builds submarines by using modular fabrication techniques. This will enable China to build as many as a dozen nuclear submarines in just three years' time.

India's submarine project is largely China-specific as Pakistan is no match. For years India has been pin-pricked by China which has significantly increased its submarines activities in the Indian Ocean and the African coast, ostensibly for anti-piracy missions even though it’s hard to fathom how a strategic asset like a submarine can be used against pirates.

The United States has decided to help India in a big way as far as this particular problem is concerned. Washington will soon be making off-the-shelf sale of surveillance drones which are going to be paired with the Poseidon military aircraft to track Chinese maritime movements in the area — particularly those of submarines.

Besides, there have been reports suggesting that the Trump administration is also working to build radar stations on islands in the Indian Ocean and an "undersea wall" of sensors between southern India and northern Indonesia to track the activities of the Chinese submarines.

The US-led international community keen on reining in China is finding a golden opportunity to do this through India as Washington’s traditional allies like Japan and South Korea have proven to be far too inadequate in meeting this strategic objective of containing China. Not just the US but other willing Indian partners like Russia and Japan too have been lending vital diplomatic and military support to India to meet the Indian deficiencies and counterbalance China.

This is the biggest dilemma for China. Even though China is far more superior than India in military terms, China is still not able to milk this advantage because of India's rapidly increasing diplomatic footprints. The Doklam episode demonstrated this Chinese dilemma.

(Rajeev Sharma is a strategic analyst and columnist
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pm-naren ... le-1750086
Why $7.8 Billion Submarine Deal Is Tough For India And Japan
Despite the close relationship between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Shinzo Abe, Japan is hesitant to plunge into negotiations on submarine exports.

Why $7.8 Billion Submarine Deal Is Tough For India And Japan
Supplying submarine technology would lock Japan and India into a tighter defence ties for years to come.
HIGHLIGHTS
Japan hesitant to plunge into negotiations on submarine exports
India just started process of submarine procurement with Japanese builder
Until 2014, Japan had a self-imposed ban on defence exports

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe holds his 10th summit with Prime Minister Narendra Modi today, underscoring the importance of strategic ties between the countries as the two face an increasingly assertive China. Supplying submarine technology would lock Japan and India into an even tighter defense relationship for years to come.

Despite the close relationship between the two right-leaning nationalist leaders, Japan is hesitant to plunge into negotiations on submarine exports.

Japan is among the countries India contacted for information about cooperating on its plans for six diesel submarines to add to the underwater fleet it is seeking to build to counter that of China, in a project worth about 50,000 crore rupees ($7.8 billion). The two governments held their first round of talks on overall defense technology cooperation last week, but are not currently in negotiations on the submarine project, according to a Japanese foreign ministry official who asked not to be named.

In India, an official from the Ministry of Defence who asked not to be named citing rules, said the process for submarine procurement had just been initiated with the Japanese submarine builder. It will be a long, drawn process, said another Ministry of Defence official.
Indian Navy spokesman D. K. Sharma said he had no comment on the matter.
While the Japanese government is not ruling out a deal, here are some reasons why it probably won't be the front runner.

Price Tag

Japan only loosened its decades-old self-imposed ban on defense exports in 2014. The exclusively domestic focus of the industry has kept it small in scale, resulting in higher costs, which are off-putting for India. The two countries have, for example, been negotiating a possible sale of ShinMaywa's US-2 amphibious aircraft for years, but have so far failed to agree on a price.
The roughly $12 billion yen ($109 million) per plane price tag, depending on specifications, is one of the key sticking points, according to the Japanese foreign ministry official. He added that the talks would take some time.

Make in India

PM Modi's campaign to have more high-tech goods made on Indian soil will make any submarine deal more difficult. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. and Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd, the two firms that build Japan's submarines, will be concerned about whether they can maintain quality, according to Abhijit Singh, a former naval officer who is now at New Delhi's Observer Research Foundation.
"That doesn't work because if Indians build it and something goes wrong then the Japanese reputation takes a knock," Singh said in an interview. Both companies declined to comment on the matter.

Japanese Reluctance

"There is still some hesitancy in the political-defense community of Japan," over loosening restrictions on defense exports, said Hiroshi Hirabayashi, a former Japanese ambassador to India, who now serves as president of the Japan-India Association. In line with its pacifist constitution, Japan until recently treated the U.S. as virtually the only exception to the ban.
Singh noted that Japan remained "secretive" about its submarine technology, which is among the most sensitive for any government.

Submarine Suitability

Japan's Soryu submarine is far larger than the model India is seeking. "It's too sophisticated for India's needs and Japan knows this," former naval officer Singh said. That would mean a re-design, which adds a fresh element of risk to a complex process.

India has widened its search for the right submarine, said K.V. Kuber, a New Delhi-based independent defense analyst who has been on several government-appointed panels on military procurement.

"The choice was always between DCNS (renamed as Naval Group) and HDW (Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft)," Kuber said. "I now see the options have included the traditional Russians, Spain's Navantia, and a new entrant in this game, Mitsubushi Kawasaki, along with Sweden's Kockums." The process has the "fundamental strength of letting the choice of the platform and the potential vendors be determined by the market forces."
PS:There are yet other major sticking points reg. acquisition of any Japanese sub.Apart from the fact that the Soryu class is meant to be the closest equiv. to an N-sub which Japan is reluctant to acquire/build becos of its N-policy,. Since we're acquiring more N-subs from Russia and building our own,we do not need the "poor man's equiv. "of an N-sub. The need of the hour and decades to come is also large nos. of smaller conventional boats,optimised for the littorals and IOR conditions to complement our N-subs. Japanese sub tech is alien to India.It also has many sensors/systems/weaponry of US origin. While it was OK for Japan and the US to sell the same to OZ,a mil. ally,India is not a Mil. ally and negotiations for a Soryu would be excruciating. Even should a way be found to acquire a Japanese sub,it means adding yet another sub-tech to the list,making maintenance and support even more complicated.

We've thus far had decades of experience with Russian (including Ru N-tech) and German tech and are now to start experiencing French tech for the first time.In addition,our own desi tech along with Ru sub-tech is being used for the series of SSBNs under construction.Two factors will be critical for the IN when it chooses the design for the P-75I sub,the AIP system,and the cost,other factors like silencing,weaponry,etc.,being almost equal. German fuel-cell AIP systems while in much use,have a danger factor due to the storage of hydrogen aboard the sub. The new fuel-recovery system is being developed supposedly both by the DRDO and Russia which is much safer.Some sort of joint dev. agreement is being thrashed by both sides out according to media reports,but as yet,there is no working example of this system aboard a sub,only on land. The cost factor is also vital.Conventional subs with their limitations are proving v.expensive.A nuclear boat,3-4 times larger with more sensors,weaponry,decoys,etc.,costs just double.That too with a reactor that could last the lifetime of the boat.So to make up numbers,they've also got to come in at a reasonable cost. Given that we're getting such sophisticated N-subs,cost will be the key factor in my opinion.

I feel that the two front-runners are the Germans and the Russians.Germans becos we've had agood innings with the U-209 U-boats,plus they come with a proven AIP system. The DCNS offer will include MESMA as the AIP system,which Pak has been using for years and knows far more about it than us. Secondly,we too have been reluctant to use MESMA for our last Scorpene boats.Pak appear to have dumped MESMA for the Swedish Striling engine system which the Chinese have adopted for their Yuan class,which Pak is getting (8). Then again the Scorpene details were leaked in toto,compromising the design and French tech. The IN isn't too keen on more from the same stable. The SWedes are dark horses,but unless their sub can beat the pants off performance wise of the rest,it suffers the Japanese syndrome of adding yet another etch.and supply line to the already established list of 3 firang tech. being used.

Having the most experience of any navy with Ru sub tech,there would be much commonality with some exg. eqpt..SOPs,etc. including our N-subs.Therefore the Russians have a slight edge,esp. as the most potent weaponry like DMos,etc. would be aboard.If the Ru /DRDO AIP system is given the nod as being perfected,it would swing the deal Rubin's way.

Apart from reg. sized subs,we also need a number of smaller mini-subs.midget subs for monitoring the chokepoints,etc. Long-endurance UUVs if developed/acquired could resolve part of the requirement,but these subs have proven their usefulness in naval history.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

X-posted from the Intl. td. The RN is in such a plight that only 25% if its warships/subs are seaworthy.In order to retain its status as an N-power,UNSC seat that comes with it,it is preserving its horrendously expensive Trident SSBN missile system at the expense of the rest of the navy.It had great ambitions of operating two new 65K t carriers,the second POW,which was launched just days ago ,but has ordered a mere handful of F-35Bs for the first carrier alone.The second carrier is most likely going to become a 'harbour queen". I offer the RN a simple solution to get some "gravy" so that its fleet can go back to sea. Sell the POW to India at a reasonable cost.The CV is of the right size. I'm sure that the US wouldn't mind selling us F-35Bs too to strengthen the relationship.In any case,the CV comes with a ski-jump ,which could also operate the successor to the Yak-141 and some mods could see an angled deck built to accommodate STOBAR birds,where the options are greater. :rotfl:
Terribly sad. The RN is desperate shape, v.sad commentary on the navy which once ruled the world's oceans.Poor Adm. Horatio Nelson must be turning in his grave at the plight of the RN today.Shame on the Brit. politicos of today.Instead of dumping part of Trident,which is the ultimate weapon of last resort and non one takes Britain seriously anymore,the billions saved could be sued to maintain a decent conventional force,esp. the RN. I suggest that the RN dump/sell its second QE carrier,offer it to India since we've earlier bought ex-RN carriers and have used them v.successfully.
I am sure that there would be many in the IN and MOD who would jump at the idea. Could we be pro-active and make an offer?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09 ... e][b]Royal Navy a 'laughing stock' with three quarters of its warships out of action and 'struggling to protect British citizens'[/b]
HMS Ocean was sent to the Caribbean for hurricane relief but has now been delayed by engine trouble - contributing to Britain being seen as a 'laughing stock' CREDIT: BRITISH MINITRY OF DEFENCE

Con Coughlin, defence editor
14 SEPTEMBER 2017 • 9:30PM
The Royal Navy can only send a quarter of its warships to sea due to spending cuts which have left the armed forces "struggling to protect Britain's citizens", the Telegraph has learned.

Currently 13 of the Navy's 19-strong fleet of Type 23 frigates and Type 45 destroyers are unable to go to sea due to a lack of manpower, fuel and supplies, senior military sources have revealed.

The cuts to defence spending have also severely hampered Britain’s response to Hurricane Irma.

HMS Ocean, the amphibious assault ship that currently serves as the Royal Navy’s flagship, was sent to provide support to the British overseas territories in the Caribbean but suffered engine problems and has now been delayed by a week.

Royal Marines with a local resident in the British Virgin Islands after Irma
The RAF flew a small number of Royal Marines, Royal Engineers and police to the Caribbean after Irma
Tonight the source said that Britain's response has turned the Navy into a "laughing stock".
[/quote]

Titbit: The MCM GSL deal is again being held up by asinine MOD babus reg. the engines aboard the vessels.The Koreans want the (single vendor) German non-magnetic engines,very sensible ,while the babus want a tender for engines that do not need to be non-magnetic! Seriously,their lack of technical knowledge is making a mockery of our defence procurement,etc. In another post,the GOI's decision to dramatically accelerate the IN's sub acquisitions within the next 5 years is dependent,says the analysts upon the role played by our MOD babus! I think that NS,out new DM,should organise asap an informal meeting of previous chiefs and V-chiefs of the services over the last two decades,to get a proper historical perspective of the security of the country as experienced by the servcies and the shortcomings in strategic planning, defence weapon systems acquisitions,MOD delays,etc.,and solutions as to improve functioning of the MOD,services and speeding up decision-making and execution of decisions made.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Austin »

Indian Navy S57 "Sinduraj" of project 08773 arrived in Severodvinsk for the 2nd mid-life repair at JSC "Ship repair center" Zvezdochka ".

Image

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/98005/
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

The R naval entity is in serious trouble...as a defaulter major.Most unlikely to get further orders unless it pays up. This means that if it defaults,the yard may be taken over,assets sold as in the sahara case.
Lenders to decide action plan on Reliance Naval loans soon
By Sangita Mehta, ET Bureau|Updated: Sep 15, 2017,

Banks led by SBI will soon call for a lenders meeting to discuss what to do with Reliance Naval and Engineering which has defaulted on loans worth Rs 9,000 crore. The Anil Ambani group firm, which was called Pipavav Shipyard and Reliance Defence in earlier avatars, has missed payments to lenders for the last two and a half months, and its loans will be classified as non-performing loan if it does not pay up in the next 15 days.

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst
samirdiw
BRFite
Posts: 184
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 22:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by samirdiw »

ShauryaT wrote:
Austin wrote:Admirals need to get their priorities right when they dont have Bread to eat they ask for Cake.
I have solution to all these shenanigans. Do a nuclear test. There will be no choice but to go indigenous.
+1
chola wrote:...with hypersonics carriers are sitting ducks during real warfare with peer powers. But during peacetime or bullying of small states


For this stuff, the Navy is planning to ditch the LCA? They need to have their heads examined. Or are they planning to go all the way through SCS across Shangai? Whats the realistic purpose of this carrier other than show their wife the new big gadget they possess now.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12196
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Pratyush »

It was always planned that the Indian navy will have 4 large 2 small aircraft carriers. This has been the plan for ages. The Navy is trying to make it come true.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Viv S »

Austin wrote:Admirals need to get their priorities right when they dont have Bread to eat they ask for Cake.

Bread Butter program like new MCVC ( Ocean and Litorral ) , New Gen Corvette , Frigate and Destroyers ,Indiginous SSK/SSN , LPD class ships would be more useful in ASW warfare and sea land operation if CSL can build it after Vikrant , Working with HAL to build a 12T Heavy Chopper instead of importing 100s from Videsh , Inducting Dhruv in large numbers , Litorral Patrol ship of 1000 T class there are dozen such bread and butter program that would need more attention from Navy instead of spending $20 billion on Aircraft Carrier which even they know wont pass the muster of FM
Again this is a mental straightjacket created by a couple of decades of exposure to the US/NATO naval operations. All you hear now is the US PoV vs the Russian PoV instead of understanding the role played by an AC in the Indian theatre.

An aircraft carrier exists primarily to protect the fleet i.e. its 'escorts'. It is the first line of defence for the battle group. Force projection/strike is a secondary function. Which is why the IAC-I was originally conceived as the ADS - Air Defence Ship.

If you want a surface fleet composed of corvettes, frigates, destroyers & LPD/LHDs - then you need a means to equip them with organic air cover. Similarly, the carrier needs frigate screen (ideally supported by SSNs) against the sub-surface threat. The three arms (surface/aviation/sub) are meant to support each other.

Rejecting the navy's need for an adequate carrier complement is less about passing over cake for bread/butter, and more a case of being penny-wise pound-foolish, considering the economic value & strategic utility of the existing & planned surface fleet.

One viable option is for the Navy to switch from its current 'Sea-Control' doctrine to a cheaper (sub-centric) 'Sea Denial' doctrine, which would obviate the need for carriers & assorted surface vessels. But it would also mean the IN would lose its ability to 'police' local sea lanes and intercept 'strategic' cargo heading to hostile states.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Viv S »

Chinmay wrote:There is something very wrong with that price. More than 20 billion USD, for a carrier? Thats more than the new Ford class, including R&D costs.
Includes the aerial component. 50 odd fighters plus 25 odd helos plus 3-4 AWACS will easily set you back by $14-15 billion (leaving about $6 bn or so for the carrier).

Given the Vishal's time-frame - 2035 induction, if sanctioned by 2020 - that's hardly an unaffordable cost. If anything, we ought to be looking at one or two sister ships to the Vishal to follow at two year intervals (something similar to what the PLAN has already set into motion).

Assuming a secular growth of 7% annually upto 2035, the Navy's current modernization budget of ~$3 bn would yield a net modernization budget of ~$102 bn over the 2020-35 period.

In the meantime, it would be worth examining an acquisition of the Juan Carlos class configured with carrier capability (à la Anadolu-class) for the Navy's MRSV contract, to reinforce the VikAd/Vikrant-based MiG-29s. While the LHDs are relatively inexpensive @$1 billion each (roughly the same as one Talwar-III/Grigorovich frigate), the STOVL complement won't be anywhere as cheap ($5-6 bn for a 25 aircraft fleet).
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

Viv,that's a sensible proposition,something similar to what I've been saying as well. Leveraging the amphib design for a fuller multi-role capability would save a lot.The duties for disaster relief, anti-piracy,etc.,do not need a full-sized carrier.These "pocket carriers" could also provide a task force with the reqd. fleet air defence. All the Japanese and SoKo amphibs will eventually have JSFs aboard if the NoKo situ and Chinese carrier expansion continues.Either JSFs or the planned new Yak-141 replacement (future) would suffice. Had the NLCA arrived,it would be able to operate too from the vessels with some deck redesign/ar-wires,angled deck. A few years ago,SAAB even had a proposal for a Sea Gripen for the Viraat,to replace Sea Harriers on that much smaller carrier. At the very least,with multi-role ASW helos aboard,they could serve as ASW carriers accompanying the fleet.

In the next decade,we're going to see more unmanned helos and aircraft arriving on carriers.The Chins have just unveiled their unmammed helo.We were trying to do something similar with our large stock of Chetak/All-3 which could serve aboard.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Viv S »

Philip wrote:Viv,that's a sensible proposition,something similar to what I've been saying as well. Leveraging the amphib design for a fuller multi-role capability would save a lot.The duties for disaster relief, anti-piracy,etc.,do not need a full-sized carrier.These "pocket carriers" could also provide a task force with the reqd. fleet air defence. All the Japanese and SoKo amphibs will eventually have JSFs aboard if the NoKo situ and Chinese carrier expansion continues.Either JSFs or the planned new Yak-141 replacement (future) would suffice. Had the NLCA arrived,it would be able to operate too from the vessels with some deck redesign/ar-wires,angled deck.
A Russian STOVL aircraft is a total chimera. If they start FSD 5 years from now i.e. by 2022 (far from given), the earliest it'll be available is 2035, with a more likely date being 2040 (just for reference, the F-35B IOCed in 2015 and will FOC around 2019). I fail to see how a Yak can be a viable option for the MRSV program with first delivery expected before 2025 (assuming the contract is signed by 2019).

The N-LCA is designed for arrested recovery. Same as the MiG-29K. So why aren't you plugging away for MiG-29K ops from the JC class? I'm guessing you have this idea in your head that since the the LCA is a 'light aircraft' it should be easier to operate from a 'light carrier'. If so, you're mistaken - neither the approach speed, nor the arresting wire clearance is significantly different from what's expected from any typical naval fighter recovering at sea.

The Juan Carlos cannot be modified with 'some deck redesign'. The flight deck doesn't extend to the rear of the ship, there isn't enough width on the port side or enough room aft of the Island, to accommodate an angled deck. Without an angled deck, arrested recovery is not possible. And the kind of redesign needed to enable STOBAR ops will be akin to designing a new ship.

I've already explained all this to you before, but I'll give one last shot. This is a scale comparison of the Vikramaditya (which itself is far short of optimum, bordering on hideous, given the size & location of its island) and the Juan Carlos. Note the extent of clearance aft of the Juan Carlos' island. And keep in mind, in its current configuration, it has only enough parking space for 5 medium-size aircraft.

Image
Image
A few years ago,SAAB even had a proposal for a Sea Gripen for the Viraat,to replace Sea Harriers on that much smaller carrier.
The Viraat is an entirely different deal. It started life as the HMS Hermes - with an ample angled deck for Sea Vixens & Scimitars.

Image
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

Tx,Viv, STOVL aircraft best for the amphibs.Like the RN's Illustrious carriers,even smaller The deck can be made wider if redesigned,as it isn't a refit of the equiv. of the Gorky.Sponsons could be used to widen the deck.Ck. the info posted about post WW2 conversion of narrow=deck Essex cl;ass CVs.Since these vessels haven't been built yet,the design could be modified.

The purpose here is for these vessels to have an xtra fxd. air wing for only xtra duties,not functioning as a reg. CV would,but an air-capable vessel,thus here would be no need. for larger 29Ks,etc..The thought of the NLCA is its smaller size ,but it has to arrive.The other option sometimes put forward is a new design using the IAC-1 hull/deck,but this would take a significant amt. of redesign and instead building a (modified,little larger) sister ship the obvious and better solution as we would then have 3 reg. med.-sized carriers which could operate the same aircraft. The amphibs can then be of smaller size,MIstrals,whatever,looking at overall costs of a second IAC-1 class + the 3/4 amphibs. Russia has designed a new Lavina class amphib,17K t but for use with KA-52s only.No ski-jump.Given the future poss. of the IN acquiring STOVL fighters,which could be integral close support a/c for amphib ops primarily,an amphib with a ski-jump preferable.That however limits the options to just the JSF and (future?) Yak-!41 $uccessor.

Essex class CVs from WWW2 are a good example of small pocket CVs,which originally had straight narrow decks but were modernised post WW2.Here's a good pic of some of them. After mods,they were 30K t+ approx. The JC is just under 30K and some reports say that we're looking at a design/vessel between 30-35K t.
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Essex-class_aircraft_carrier
Oriskany, which had been left unfinished at the end of the war, was completed to an improved design between August 1948 and September 1950, with a much stronger (straight) flight deck and a reconfigured island. Eight earlier ships were thoroughly rebuilt to the Oriskany design under the SCB-27A program in the early 1950s.[20] Six more of the earlier ships were rebuilt to an improved 27C design as the last stage of the SCB-27 program; these ships received steam catapults instead of the less powerful hydraulic units. The otherwise unmodified Antietam received an experimental 10.5 degree angled deck in 1952.[20] An angled flight deck and enclosed hurricane bow became the distinctive features of the SCB-125 program, which was undertaken concurrently with the last three 27C conversions and later applied to all 27A and 27C ships except Lake Champlain.[20] Shangri-La became the first operational United States angled deck aircraft carrier in 1955.[20] Oriskany, the first of the modernized ships but the last angled-deck conversion, received a unique SCB-125A refit which upgraded her to 27C standard, and included steam catapults and an aluminum flight deck.[20]

Korean War and subsequent Cold War needs ensured twenty-two of the twenty-four ships had extensive post–World War II service (Bunker Hill and Franklin had suffered heavy damage and were never recommissioned).[21] All initially carried attack air groups; however by 1955 seven unconverted Essexes were operating under the anti-submarine warfare carrier (CVS) designation established in August 1953.[20] As the Forrestal-class "supercarriers" entered the fleet, the eight 27A conversions were designated CVS to replace the original unconverted ships;[20] the latter began to leave active service in the late 1950s. Two 27C conversions were designated CVS in 1962 (although CVS-11 Intrepid would operate as an attack carrier off Vietnam) and two more in 1969.[20] The seven angle-deck 27As and one 27C received specialized CVS modifications including bow-mounted SQS-23 sonar under the SCB-144 program in the early 1960s.[20] The updated units remained active until age and the growing number of supercarriers made them obsolete, from the late 1960s into the middle 1970s. However, one of the very first of the type, Lexington, served until 1991 as a training ship
Last edited by Philip on 16 Sep 2017 14:22, edited 1 time in total.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Singha »

the hyuga class is ideal soln to our ASW problem and sea command staff can be accomodated. the mistrals are clumsy ro-ro type hathis vs the sleek fast hyugas able to keep pace with DDG task forces and pack in ASW helis and UAVs in future
Image

200m
19000t full load
18 helis
30 knot top speed (a full 10 knot faster than ugly tubs like mistral and rotterdams)

these are fighting teethy ships built to take on cheen and russian subs and not show ships meant to beat up some poor arab or african nation like EU builds for these days
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by srin »

I'm orienting towards the Kiev class (the original Gorshkov). A dozen helos, but also a squadron of F-35Bs. And around 100+ SAMs. Takes care of both ASW and Air defence.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Viv S »

Philip wrote:Tx,Viv, STOVL aircraft best for the amphibs.Like the RN's Illustrious carriers,even smaller The deck can be made wider if redesigned,as it isn't a refit of the equiv. of the Gorky.Sponsons could be used to widen the deck.Since these are only "xtras",not reg. carriers,but an air-capable vessel,there would be no need. for larger 29Ks,etc..The other option sometimes put forward is a new design using the IAC-1 hull/deck,but this would take a significant amt. of redesign and instead building a (modified,little larger) sister ship the obvious solution! The amphibs can then be o smaller size,MIstrals,whatever.
The Illustrious was a flat deck catapult carrier, the main strip could handle bolters. As for the Victorious conversion - that was a no minor modification. It was a proper Gorshkov-style reconstruction. The ship's weight went up by 25% and it took more than 5 years to implement.

As far as the Juan Carlos is concerned - no you cannot put 6000 sq.ft of tarmac out on a sponson and brace it to support a 13 ton aircraft making a hard landing without screwing up the weight distribution of the vessel. If such a thing was doable the Vikramaditya's deck would have resembled that of the Nimitz after its modernization at Sevmash. If you want a vessel capable of STOBAR ops, you select & buy a vessel designed for STOBAR ops. What you don't do, is take a well-balanced cost-effective LHD and b*****dize the hell out of it. Unless of course one wants to repeat joyous Gorshkov saga.

Buying a second Vikrant-class carrier, might have been a viable idea if the first one hadn't been hamstrung by its Russian-designed aviation complex. An order for a new ship would mean spending $4 bn to either equip a carrier with N-Tejas & MiG-29Ks shared with the other carriers, or buying a more capable aircraft without any redundancy (since it wouldn't be compatible with the other ships for when its parent ship was in refit).

In contrast, we have four MRSV vessels planned which being identical can share a common pool of jets, airmen and deck crew, with at least two ships ready for deployment, with one in maintenance and the last in refit.
Russia has designed a new Lavina class amphib,17K t but for use with KA-52s only.No ski-jump.Given the future poss. of the IN acquiring STOVL fighters,which could be integral close support a/c for amphib ops primarily,an amphib with a ski-jump preferable.That however limits the options to just the JSF and (future?) Yak-!41 $uccessor.
The RFPs for the MRSV have already been issued to RDEL and L&T which already have existing tie-ups for proven designs. Given that there is no 3rd pvt sector yard with the infrastructure & finances to compete, and that Lavina is just a concept at this point - there is no scope for its participation here.

As to the last point - the Yak 141 successor is just vaporware i.e. one step short of a concept and two steps short of being a paper project. Right now they're only considering whether to green-light the project. Then they will need to decide what performance to demand from a STOVL design. Then they will need to study the available design options and pick one. That will be followed by a full scale development program. And if all goes well, they might be able start deliveries 20 years from now. To compare that to the F-35B that's already in service, and will in all likelihood receive its FOC before the Russians have even made a decision on the Yak proposal, is completely ridiculous.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Philip »

'm orienting towards the Kiev class (the original Gorshkov). A dozen helos, but also a squadron of F-35Bs. And around 100+ SAMs. Takes care of both ASW and Air defence.
:rotfl:

Welcome comrade Srinsky! However,seriously looking at the problem,a flight deck which has fxd. wing aircraft options ,angled deck + ski-jump ideal.Size around 35K t.But these being larger ,req. larger lifts,etc.,would also be more expensive and we would be able to afford perhaps only 2-3.A JC is about $500M without aircraft/helos.JSFs around $100M+ No idea when the Yak-!$! successors will arrive,but def. at much cheaper cost.

Instead of a KIev class hybrid,I would suggest that the IN build a new class of CGs,not as large as the Kirov N-powered battlecruisers,but more akin to the Slava class 12-14K t.The same hull could be used as we've done with the Krivak hulls turning them into Talwars. I did a rough redesign of a Slava for academic sake,where one could replace the 16 SS-N-12 Sandbox missiles,huge beasts,with BMos/BMos-NG. These missiles are so big and take up so much space that theoretically 40 BMos SSMs could replace them (!),if one used a double-deck 3+2 on top arrangement for each module. (Remember the Nanuchka SSM modules? They had 2+1 on top.Here it would be 3+ 2 on top.) Aft of the stack the exg. Slavas have 8X8 rotary silos packing 64 S-300 SAMs,could be replaced with S-400s ,even better giving the vessels an enhanced ABM capability,or B-8s if need be,but these would not be Mach 4 SAMs like the S-300/400s. Instead,the 40 SA-N-4 SAMs installed could be replaced by Barak-1/8s VLS modules. Redesign of the forward "B" turret zone,where ADGs are fxd.,could instead have more SAMs or instead VLS silos for (ASW) Klubs/Kalibir land attack, plus relocated ASW MBUs. Amidship gatlings could be replaced with 4 gun/missile Pantsir systems (20KM dome),replacements for the Kashtan,giving the vessel a 3rd layer of air/missile defence.The vessel would thus have an incredible amt. of SAMs (LR/ABM S-300/400,MR/SR Barak-8,Pantsir BPDMS),BMos/Kalibir SSMs,Klub and ASW capability (ASW Klub,MBUs,Medvedka,etc.).

Pantsir:
Another big difference is the fire rate. The Pantsir-S systems can shoot 80 artillery projectiles per second (4,800 per minute), while the sea-based system will be able to fire 160 projectiles per second (nearly 10,000 rounds per minute).
The Pantsir-ME can track and shoot down four air targets at the same time including jets, bombers, UAVs, and missiles.“The Pantsir-ME creates a 20 km anti-aircraft dome around the ship it’s installed on.
Redesign of the stern superstructure to accommodate two ASW/AEW helos as in IN ships reqd. There could even be a below deck hangar for helo/UUVs as featured in an Ru corvette design.Our LUH /LUH chosen could also fit in here,adding to the no./mix carried. Since these vessels would still be only 12-14Kt,we would be able to build/afford a block of 3 to accompany our CBGs.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by chola »

Viv S wrote: Buying a second Vikrant-class carrier, might have been a viable idea if the first one hadn't been hamstrung by its Russian-designed aviation complex. An order for a new ship would mean spending $4 bn to either equip a carrier with N-Tejas & MiG-29Ks shared with the other carriers, or buying a more capable aircraft without any redundancy (since it wouldn't be compatible with the other ships for when its parent ship was in refit).
You know, if the MoD refuses to fund a CATOBAR in the near term then a redesigned Vikrant is worth it. The CATOBAR would not have had any redundancy either.

So much damn heartache and sadness after learning of the lift issues in the Vikrant. Followed this ship's progress with so much anticipation. There was no reason to believe it was anything but a modern design capable of handling anything. Then the MiG response/threat fell like a hammer on my dreams and expectations. Stupid russkies!!!

A second Vikrant follow-on that is able to handle anything up to Rafales, SHornets and even Su-33s (maybe HAL after years of building Flankers can build something other than MKI) would do much to correct the class.

Considering the worse case scenario that the 65K-Ton CATOBAR is simply unaffordable at $20B for decades to come, we might need to stay with a STOBAR carrier fleet. In that case, the Vikrant class needs to be fixed so it can provide us with a few more ships.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Post by Viv S »

chola wrote:You know, if the MoD refuses to fund a CATOBAR in the near term then a redesigned Vikrant is worth it. The CATOBAR would not have had any redundancy either.
A CATOBAR carrier (i.e. Vishal) is decades away. Its not realistic to expect it before 2030 (and quite likely 2035). Redundancy could be achieved by sanctioning a sister ship to it.
So much damn heartache and sadness after learning of the lift issues in the Vikrant. Followed this ship's progress with so much anticipation. There was no reason to believe it was anything but a modern design capable of handling anything. Then the MiG response/threat fell like a hammer on my dreams and expectations. Stupid russkies!!!
Well the Russians ensured that the ship would be compatible only their own product. I don't think 'stupid' is the right word to describe them. Its a more appropriate adjective for our own planners in the IN & DND who were managing the project (either that or some form of 'quid pro quo' was in play). Giving the lifts just another 3 metres of clearance could have been achieved with minimal impact on the structure are a whole. I can't think of any justification for the decision made. Can't blame this one on the MoD.
A second Vikrant follow-on that is able to handle anything up to Rafales, SHornets and even Su-33s (maybe HAL after years of building Flankers can build something other than MKI) would do much to correct the class.
The aircraft will still only be available for naval operations about 2/3rds of the time which is a heavy price given the ship's $4 bn price tag.

Cheaper to let the MRSVs double up as STOVL carriers IMO. You could get the full set of 4 LHDs for $4 bn, built at a pvt yard, and available for HADR ops, sea control as well as amphibious assault. Equip them with 2 x 20 F-35Bs and pair with the Viks (which can be equipped with a larger hptr complement).
Considering the worse case scenario that the 65K-Ton CATOBAR is simply unaffordable at $20B for decades to come, we might need to stay with a STOBAR carrier fleet. In that case, the Vikrant class needs to be fixed so it can provide us with a few more ships.
Its not unaffordable because its decades away. Also, the $20 bn tag includes the air component; 50 fighters + 25 helos + 4 AWACS (for a benchmark, keeping in mind, we spent $9 bn on 36 Rafales).
Locked