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.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2042
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JTull » 11 Mar 2017 20:18

abhik wrote:So lowest bidder with likely less capable system wins? There needs to be a better way to down select.


Down select based on technical capabilities has been done. IN will chose the design that delivers on all that it requires - which I assume both should do. Only then cost comes into picture. I'd assume, amount of work done locally will determine the total cost. But Reliance (esp Anil bhai) have a history of winning contracts and then delivering sub-standard end-product.

Hence, I prefer both the shipyards to work on 2 each of the same design leaving no room for games. When the ships get operational, it will be clear who did better. If both are satisfactory, then we'd have two private shipyards capable of building large naval vessels.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3273
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 12 Mar 2017 00:37

IPKF troops, presumably boarding the merchant vessel. Did we contract civvie ships for the deployment?

Image

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3273
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 12 Mar 2017 03:50

Admiral Grigorovich class frigate. Main differences w/ Talwar class:

1. Larger helicopter deck which extends all corners of the stern. Not sure if this is an improvement or a RuN vs IN design preference.

Image

Image

2. Newer, stealthier turret design for main gun

Image

3. VLS system out front instead of arm based launcher:

Image

While Shivalik class generally outclasses Talwars, it is not as strong on ASW front due to lack of HWT fitment. Now that was during commissioning of shivalike and some of the members here told me that it was remedied later.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10742
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Gagan » 12 Mar 2017 22:57

Aditya G wrote:IPKF troops, presumably boarding the merchant vessel. Did we contract civvie ships for the deployment?

Image

MV Harshavardhan

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10742
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Gagan » 12 Mar 2017 22:59

They had also leased MV Akbar for this

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 13 Mar 2017 12:31

The Falklands War was won becos of STUFT."Ships Taken Up From Trade". This provided the massive logistic requirement needed to fight a war at the other end of the world in hostile arctic-like weather,where the enemy's land mass was infinitely closer from where he could launch air attacks against the RN fleet . The IN similarly should have a wartime plan in place where all SCI assets and other Indian merchant shipping must on demand, hand over their ships plus crews to the GOI for IN wartime use. A close relative of mine,after retiring from the IN joined the SCI/merchant marine. He used to take part in A&N exercises with the rest of the fleet skippering his vessel carrying huge mobile radars,MBTs,troops,etc.

Now that MP has gone back to Goa,big loss for the defence establishment,we need to find a worthy successor who is both technically savvy and has a strong understanding of military matters. I am sure Gen. VKS will be making an attempt to secure the job,and a military man will be a good figure to cut through MOD babu bullsh*t,but I feel that the party may choose someone like Ram Madhav,who has a long organisational background. Shifting Gen. Singh to a post of Dy. Def. Min./Def. Production, may also be a good idea where he can advise whoever the party chooses as Defd. Min.,a senior figure.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2042
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JTull » 13 Mar 2017 18:40

Japan is sending it's biggest warship for Malabar exercise

Izumo helicopter carrier is coming for a visit!

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 13 Mar 2017 19:04

Philip wrote:Now that MP has gone back to Goa,big loss for the defence establishment,we need to find a worthy successor who is both technically savvy and has a strong understanding of military matters. I am sure Gen. VKS will be making an attempt to secure the job,and a military man will be a good figure to cut through MOD babu bullsh*t,but I feel that the party may choose someone like Ram Madhav,who has a long organisational background. Shifting Gen. Singh to a post of Dy. Def. Min./Def. Production, may also be a good idea where he can advise whoever the party chooses as Defd. Min.,a senior figure.

OT but this loss is a bit disconcerting. They have gone back to Jet Lee... Not very sure about this although maybe he can make things move faster considering his role in finance

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 275
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby sohamn » 13 Mar 2017 23:35

Jet Lee is just a temp till they can fill the role long term.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3273
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 14 Mar 2017 02:44

One hopes that protocols are still in place and practiced regularly. recently for Op Rahat (Yemen) we did deploy civvie ships to rescue stranded desis;

Image

With ICG grown to be a very large force, we need to legalize their role in war as well.

Philip wrote:The Falklands War was won becos of STUFT."Ships Taken Up From Trade". This provided the massive logistic requirement needed to fight a war at the other end of the world in hostile arctic-like weather,where the enemy's land mass was infinitely closer from where he could launch air attacks against the RN fleet . The IN similarly should have a wartime plan in place where all SCI assets and other Indian merchant shipping must on demand, hand over their ships plus crews to the GOI for IN wartime use. A close relative of mine,after retiring from the IN joined the SCI/merchant marine. He used to take part in A&N exercises with the rest of the fleet skippering his vessel carrying huge mobile radars,MBTs,troops,etc.

Now that MP has gone back to Goa,big loss for the defence establishment,we need to find a worthy successor who is both technically savvy and has a strong understanding of military matters. I am sure Gen. VKS will be making an attempt to secure the job,and a military man will be a good figure to cut through MOD babu bullsh*t,but I feel that the party may choose someone like Ram Madhav,who has a long organisational background. Shifting Gen. Singh to a post of Dy. Def. Min./Def. Production, may also be a good idea where he can advise whoever the party chooses as Defd. Min.,a senior figure.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33969
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 14 Mar 2017 07:49

Aditya G wrote:IPKF troops, presumably boarding the merchant vessel. Did we contract civvie ships for the deployment?

Image

Weird. Non regulation haircuts. Too much hair

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 11:06

Bangladesh has added 2 Chinese Ming Class viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4752&p=2128761#p2128760

Just matter of time they will add Yuan class into their Navy , Bangladesh is now slowly but firmly moving into Chinese infulence , They have any ways been hostile to india , killed our 16 BSF jawans not long ago.

Details on BN Ming Class Subs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W-BoV3XyxI

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 14 Mar 2017 12:10

BDesh is also engaged with us in some def trg. aspects.It is trying to balance the relationship,getting freebies from the Dragon,while mending fences with us.

Apparently,we're about 50% short of capital ships,ocean-going corvettes/light frigates,FFGs,DDGs,CVs, The IN wants at least 24 FFGs but has only 12.
Our yards are choc-a-bloc with orders and many projects are delayed.Hence the speedy acquisition need for the extra Talwars/Grig'vitch frigates from Russia.

An arrogant and asinine Chinese analyst,one "Leaky-You",has gleefully received the news about the Viraat's retirement as a "failure" of the IN's carrier ambitions,which he says India cannot aspire too because of our technological backwardness,etc.,etc.He also outlines China's pompous carrier ambitions where they want to have six,two meant just for the IOR,For the record, the nauseous sh*twrm needs a befitting reply!

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pla- ... 03038.html

In his long-winded piece ( from overeating raw dogmeat),Leaky-U has got many of his facts dead wrong.We bought the Viraat,for just over $500M.A steal at that price.I remember an admiral who came with the ship from the UK telling his former CNS what a beauty she was,her excellent condition,etc. The Viraat served us v.well for almost 3 decades and it is only the absence of Sea Harriers/Harriers that we've retd. the ship early. In fact,we could've kept her on in the amphib role,but even here we have no heavy duty helos!

Secondly,he says that the Gorshkov/Vik-A acquisition was too expensive. The final cost was still a bargain at the current rate a couple of years ago and we had no other alternative but the even larger Varyag for which there was no port in the country which could berth her. How many billions did the Chinese spend on literally rebuilding the Varyaag may one ask Leaky-U? Now for tech support.Where have the Chinese got their home-grown carrier tech from? All their carrier tech,etc. has been obtained from the Russians and UKR.Even their carrier aircraft are unlicensed copies of SU-33s. Cheating and espionage are the hallmarks of China's so-called home-developed military expertise.

Now for their ambitions of sending 2 carriers into the IOR."Good sport" for the IN when the sh*t his the fan.Plus,if the reports are true that China is to base its marines at Gwadar,more pig-sticking time for the IN here too!
India has never boasted of its naval mil.prowess,even though we're perhaps the most ancient of maritime nations of Asia,taking our religions,philosophy far into the heartlands of Asia,Korea,Japan,even China with Buddhism and Hinduism! We've asked for assistance in carrier tech openly and have launched our first med. sized CV. No doubt more will follow. This is exactly what alarms the Ch*nkos of Commie China. The thought of Indian nuclear-powered carriers not only dominating the IOR with the threat of sending their precious oil and trade to Davy Jones' Locker,but operating with impunity in the Asia-Pacific waters and the Indo-China Sea,especially if they're part of an anti-China maritime alliance with China's current bete-noire America!

Hence this impious missive from this yellow-livered "Leaky bottom". It also underscores a grim warning to our def. strategists about the open Chinese intentions which has been in the works for decades.There is a famous book on Pearl Harbour ."At dawn we slept". The threat from China is very,very,real.Let us not have to in the future repent at leisure ,taken by surprise by the PLAN and PN working together against India.The IN requires a massive induction of assets across the spectrum and that requires putting one's hand into one's pocket and finding the cash. Finance delayed,a few years down the line may be too late.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Mar 2017 21:53

Chinese threats in the ior mainly consists of nuke subs and their ssks given to pn etc. Cbgs are still some ways off. What India truly needs is a much larger fleet of mpaas. More p8s and an even larger fleet of some easily available high endurance bird modified with indoisraeli suite with anti ship and sub munitions. IN needs a boatload o of these.

Cbgs can be handled with a dedicated backfire force with ability to strike fast and far with massive Brahmos swarms. A modded shourya should also be developed for anti carrier duties.

Lastly a number of ssns and ssgns to prowl SCS to take the fight to them would be useful. IN carriers are not going to do much in that region. Although they might be more potent if equipped with jsf instead of raffle or hornet.

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

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Bheeshma » 14 Mar 2017 22:09

P-8I's are costly. Maybe 16 max ia what we can afford. Like the AEWC now we need a MRMP based on C-295 or equivalent that is made in India with Indian private players.One can dream but hopefully 16 P-8I's backed by 24 C-295 based MRMP's and 36 Do-228's would be awesome.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Mar 2017 23:05

So, how many IL38s are still in service? Iirc, there used to be 7 upgraded with the sea dragon suite and armed with the uran. Wonder why the Klub was not chosen instead since Brahmos is likely too big.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 23:12

Cain Marko wrote:So, how many IL38s are still in service? Iirc, there used to be 7 upgraded with the sea dragon suite and armed with the uran. Wonder why the Klub was not chosen instead since Brahmos is likely too big.


Klub missile is not light either weighs from 1.7 T to 2.3 T depending on variant , Kh-35UE weighs around ~ 550 kg
http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/563/

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35369
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby SaiK » 15 Mar 2017 03:15


Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Mar 2017 06:27

Austin wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:So, how many IL38s are still in service? Iirc, there used to be 7 upgraded with the sea dragon suite and armed with the uran. Wonder why the Klub was not chosen instead since Brahmos is likely too big.


Klub missile is not light either weighs from 1.7 T to 2.3 T depending on variant , Kh-35UE weighs around ~ 550 kg
http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/563/

You are probably correct although I'm not sure if it is the weight that will be an issue. The size/length might also be a problem for the klub (29ft) vs. the Uran (12ft)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 15 Mar 2017 11:27

Given the low number of aircraft reqd.,just around 60,there is little point in getting them built in India,unless a naval version of the FGFA is on the anvil and the IAF seal the FGFA deal.60 SH's wanted "7 years from now",will also be terribly long in the tooth,cost upward of around $75M a pop,and will be outclassed by PLAN clones of the SU-033 plus any naval version of their stealth bird. Therefore there's little point in going for the SH.A better bet 7 years from now would be-if a Yanqui bird is needed,the JSF,STOVL version which would be able to land on the other 2 existing carriers as well.If the Cat version can also do STOBAR launches on the Vik-A/IAC-1,,then the cheaper Cat version could be acquired,but even this will cost around $125M /unitat least. Maintaining and operating such a sophisticated bird is going to be a huge task for any force,but given its attributes ,probably a bettre bet than the naval Gripen. However,the proven bird is the Rafale which the IAF has also purchased.Here,more Rafales operating with both the IAF and IN would be the best non-Russian bet.There is scope for more dev. of the Rafale when compared with the SH,which is also inferior to it. EW versions of the Rafale can be obtained/developed in 7 years time and when a naval FGFA arrives,it can complement the existing naval strike birds plus replace/ugment he MIG-29Ks which could be moved to our forward island bases taking up the slack of the IAF.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 16 Mar 2017 11:14

Goa Shipyard nominated to build two stealth frigates for the Indian navy

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/goa ... ndian-navy

NEW DELHI - India's private shipyards are unhappy with a Ministry of Defense decision to nominate state-owned shipyard Goa Shipyard to build two Russian Krivak-class stealth frigates over two private sector competitors, Larsen & Toubro and Reliance Defence and Engineering.

During a meeting with Russian defense officials last week, MoD has cleared a $4.48 billion program to acquire four Krivak-class stealth frigates under which two will be built by Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation and the remaining two by Goa Shipyard, a senior MoD official said.

“A formal contract is expected to be awarded within the next four months”, the official said, adding that USC will deliver the frigates in the next four years but Goa Shipyard will take eight years to deliver.


“The private-sector shipyards have already brought it to the notice to MoD informally their unhappiness on giving GSL the contract to build the two Krivak class frigates on nomination basis,” an executive of the industry lobby group Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry said, requesting anonymity to speak candidly.


"They (private shipyards) want greater orders to push the private sector," the FICCI executive noted.

Anil Jai Singh, retired Indian Navy Commodore and defense analyst, said, "This decision (to nominate GSL for two Krivak class frigates) has indeed surprised me."

GSL is a very capable yard but has never built anything of the size and sophistication of the Krivaks, Singh said.

“It seems that the MoD continues to live in the A K Anthony (former Defense Minister) era with nominations more the rule than the exception," says Sujeet Samaddar, retired Indian Navy commodore and defense analyst. "The private shipyards must be allowed to compete. But having said that, unless the private sector shipyards deliver on their existing orders of simple ships, there can be very little ground to trust them to deliver complicated warships."


Samaddar, however, does not doubt the capability of Goa Shipyard and said, "GSL has made more than 16 anti-submarine-warfare corvettes in the past and on paper they can build it."

The Indian navy has been negotiating with Russia for over three years to acquire the Krivak frigates.

"The Krivaks (Indian navy's Talwar class) are very sophisticated frigates and combine high stealth with lethal kinetic capability," Singh added.

“This is a longstanding requirement of the Indian navy and will possibly cover the gap created by the decommissioning of Godavari & Rajput-class warships that would fall due in the next three to four years," Samaddar said.

By 2027, the Indian navy aims to have 198 ships against the current fleet strength of 137 warships. With a shortage of 61 warships, the service is currently building 48 warships at various Indian shipyards.

An Indian navy official said, "Because of their lack of experience in building major warships, the private sector is way behind in warship building but needs greater exposure to orders."

However, Singh is critical of the decision to nominate state-owned shipyards at the cost of growth of the private sector shipyards. "Private shipyards are hardly being given any orders despite the state-owned shipyards creaking under the load of their order book leading to cost and time overruns in almost all projects. Of the four major private shipyards in the country, two are bankrupt."

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 16 Mar 2017 12:01

8 years seems to long to build a frigate.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 16 Mar 2017 12:38

I think a few years ago,the Russians examined our shipyards and found L&T's Katu. yard near Chennai as the best for building subs.,as they had the best technical manpower.Other yards like ABG,WISL have floundered. Some weeks ago I posted an astonishing report about the Chinese building new 1500t ASW corvettes at the rate of a new hull every 6 weeks!

http://www.janes.com/article/63612/chin ... -corvettes
Xcpt from Janes' IHS.
The two vessels are both anti-submarine warfare (ASW) variants and will be equipped with towed array and variable depth sonars.
The first of China's 1,500-tonne Type 056 corvettes was launched in May 2012, so the rate of production over the last four years has averaged a new hull about every six weeks. This is being achieved by constructing the ships in four shipyards: the Huangpu shipyard in southern China, the Liaonan shipyard in Dalian in the north, plus the two mentioned above.

The planned size of the class is not known but it seems likely that the total number of ships could be around 60. Armed with four YJ-83 anti-ship missiles, a 76 mm gun, lightweight torpedo launchers and HQ-10 short-range surface-to-air missiles, these ships are expected to be tasked primarily with the role of coastal defence role. Of the 36 vessels in service or under construction, 14 are configured as the ASW variant.


Now where are our planned 16 "shallow-water" ASW corvettes to replace the Pauk/Abhay series? Ours are half the size and appear to be underarmed,with no helo deck,which could considerably augment the capability using land based ASW helos,given that the max intended operating range from the coastline would be only 200nm. There also appears to be no main gun,just 2 remote 12.7mm turrets,perhaps the same that is being developed for our AVs.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 16 Mar 2017 13:48

Karthik S wrote:8 years seems to long to build a frigate.


Hmmm , Not really check MDL or GSL track record in building ships , GSL is still new puppy in the block with no experience to build frigate , MDL was still power house , 8 years is long by global standards but our yards have taken that long such ships and knowing well for GSL its greenfield project.

I think this deal is just a partying gift by Parrikar to GSL besides that he gave GSL the big project for MCM ships thats $ 2 billion deal and new class of CG vessel , New Mopa airport besides Dabolim , True to being a politicians his position at MOD helped Goa state a lot ......IIRC he even moved Defexpo to Goa and hence forth it will be held there.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 16 Mar 2017 13:59

If that's the case then very disappointing and unexpected from MP. With china arming both our neighbours with subs and patrol vessels and it itself increasing it's activity, making country wait for 8 years for an important platform is unforgivable.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 16 Mar 2017 14:05

^^ GSL has to start from somewhere they havent built any thing better High Speed Boats and AOPV for CG/IN , They would even take twice the amount of time that Soko would take to build MCMV but IIRC GSL has a record of build projects on time unlike MDL/HSL/GRSE , so they might even better that time as they gain experience.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 16 Mar 2017 14:21

Sorry I don't quite get the reasoning that GSL has to start somewhere. Why should we help a shipyard gain experience? Why should we increase the number of shipyards rather than increase the number of yards in GRSE, HSL etc. Even if the idea is to have many shipyards across India, how much are we willing to compromise? Will the chinese, massa or any other country would have agreed to this?

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1037
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 16 Mar 2017 14:42

Quite obvious isn't it ? MP heart was always in Goa so GEL gets it. and despite all paens to him he has also presided over the constant denigration of the armed forces. And the fact that it was deemed imp to move RM to a tiny state like Goa where there is no majority just shows the contempt that national security is held in by our politicians. In any other sane country a senior veteran would have been given the job. But not here.

Jet Lee will be disaster like he was before. Some one suggested Ram Madav. That might be a good idea. RSS needs to step in. Govt or MoD ke bas Ka nahi hai.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Mar 2017 15:03

Akshay Kapoor wrote:Quite obvious isn't it ? MP heart was always in Goa so GEL gets it. and despite all paens to him he has also presided over the constant denigration of the armed forces. And the fact that it was deemed imp to move RM to a tiny state like Goa where there is no majority just shows the contempt that national security is held in by our politicians. In any other sane country a senior veteran would have been given the job. But not here.

Jet Lee will be disaster like he was before. Some one suggested Ram Madav. That might be a good idea. RSS needs to step in. Govt or MoD ke bas Ka nahi hai.


+1

MP also took Heli MRO and MiG-29K MRO to Goa. While the MiG-29K might make sense given the IN air base, I am not sure about the heli MRO facility.

Plus I am highly disappointed on the decision to send MP back at a crucial juncture. All that he did in last 3 yrs may get washed off in next 3months. Especially when the SP clause in DPP which would have far fetching effect on our MIC, was to be finalised in next few days.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karthik S » 16 Mar 2017 15:12

All this didn't help BJP get majority, had that happened, MP could have continued as DM.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Mar 2017 17:13

Karthik S wrote:All this didn't help BJP get majority, had that happened, MP could have continued as DM.


What he did will bear fruits in long term for locals. He's even pulling Aero India to Goa. May be him being DM is better for Goa than being CM. :lol:

May be others screwed it up in his absence. But this is OT here.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Rakesh » 17 Mar 2017 04:31

The problem with India’s naval build-up
http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/itCxLcl ... ildup.html

By Abhijit Iyer-Mitra: senior fellow at the Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies (IP&CS).

Naval build-ups, because of their capital-intensive nature, are frequently more fatal to the originator than they are to the opposition.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Rakesh » 17 Mar 2017 04:33

Periscope: Indian Navy’s four critical needs
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/opinion/ ... needs.html

By Vice Admiral Arun Kumar Singh - retired as Commander-in-Chief of the Navy's Eastern Naval Command in 2007. A nuclear and missile specialist trained in the former Soviet Union, he was also DG Indian Coast Guard.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3273
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Aditya G » 17 Mar 2017 05:14

Rakesh wrote:The problem with India’s naval build-up
http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/itCxLcl ... ildup.html

By Abhijit Iyer-Mitra: senior fellow at the Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies (IP&CS).

Naval build-ups, because of their capital-intensive nature, are frequently more fatal to the originator than they are to the opposition.


Aircraft Carriers seem to divide naval planners around the world.

Nevertheless, IN is firm on acquiring a 3 carrier fleet which is a reasonable target. I would prefer to order a Vikrant class carrier right away, with a more ASW oriented airwing compared to the original. Vishal can find its way in due course.

There is much commentary on the submarine and MCMV acquisition already. However corvettes are a source of concern as well since they form the numerical backbone.

1. ASW Corvettes. There is absolutely no news of Shallow water ASW craft and no news of more Project-28 ships. What the hell is happening? GRSE has a tardy pace of construction with remaining Abhay class due to be retired soon.

2. Missile Corvettes. There was news of Next Gen Missle Vessels followed by Next Generation Corvettes, but no prototype or design has been released. I am expecting the Veer class corvettes will start retiring soon in large numbers.

In the above context GOI decision to pursue 4 more talwars at GSL is absolutely worth it. It will help us keep the ASW and missile edge in IOR.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4998
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby ShauryaT » 17 Mar 2017 05:47

Rakesh wrote:The problem with India’s naval build-up
http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/itCxLcl ... ildup.html

By Abhijit Iyer-Mitra: senior fellow at the Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies (IP&CS).

Naval build-ups, because of their capital-intensive nature, are frequently more fatal to the originator than they are to the opposition.
Do not agree with many of the use cases the author has used including the the comparison to PLAN and the rim states examples.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Philip » 17 Mar 2017 12:27

With China also reportedly building a 50,000t carrier,there is our option-the fastest one,to build a sister ship of IAC-1,slightly larger of around 50-55K t as said many a time.This will allow commonality of most of the eqpt.,make it easier for the yard to complete,plus training of crews the same as for IAC-1.The cost benefits are obvious. The slightly larger size will allow for extra aircraft or helos. The N-powered EMALS vessel,could be deferred to the next decade planned to arrive around 2030.IAC-2 if started sometime in 2018,could arrive even before 2025.Upgraded 29Ks or even naval Rafales could operate from her deck.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1737
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chola » 17 Mar 2017 15:32

Philip wrote:With China also reportedly building a 50,000t carrier,there is our option-the fastest one,to build a sister ship of IAC-1,slightly larger of around 50-55K t as said many a time.This will allow commonality of most of the eqpt.,make it easier for the yard to complete,plus training of crews the same as for IAC-1.The cost benefits are obvious. The slightly larger size will allow for extra aircraft or helos. The N-powered EMALS vessel,could be deferred to the next decade planned to arrive around 2030.IAC-2 if started sometime in 2018,could arrive even before 2025.Upgraded 29Ks or even naval Rafales could operate from her deck.



Let's see how Vikrant fare once it is completed before we go and order another. The truth is STOBAR is dead end.

I rather we put any of our extra money on the Vishal with Unkil's cooperation (CATOBAR, EMALS and maybe nuke powerplant) to provide the blueprint for any new carrier going foreward.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 842
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Mihir » 17 Mar 2017 22:04

Rakesh wrote:The problem with India’s naval build-up
http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/itCxLcl ... ildup.html

By Abhijit Iyer-Mitra: senior fellow at the Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies (IP&CS).

Naval build-ups, because of their capital-intensive nature, are frequently more fatal to the originator than they are to the opposition.


X-posting my reply to this tripe from Facebook:

The sheer amount of bad history and bad analysis in this piece is astounding. Every paragraph in there is dripping with rookie mistakes. For instance, take the claims that Tirpitz’s naval buildup contributed to Germany’s defeat in World War I, or that Gorshkov’s buildup “directly contributed to the fall of the USSR.” Any decent history book will tell you that the Germans lost World War I because of severe resource constraints. Taking on four great powers in combat is not a very good idea; neither is throwing hundreds of thousands of men into frontal assaults on heavily fortified lines, that too against multiple enemies whose combined manpower reserve far exceeds yours. The “naval buildup” was a very minor factor in all this. The USSR, on the other hand, collapsed because its economic system was terribly managed, and the country spent far too much on the military. At one point, defence spending accounted for some 15% of the Soviet GDP. It doesn’t take much to imagine this is not sustainable. Again, the naval buildup was part of this, but so was the massive amount of wealth poured into the strategic rocket forces, the PVO/VVS, and the land army.

Further, these are two cherry-picked examples. A good analysis would also explore counter-examples: such as Britain’s decision to maintain a carrier fleet despite shrinking budgets, which allowed it to achieve victory over a more powerful (on paper) Argentine military. Or the dominance that the Imperial Japanese carrier fleet exercised over Asia (including over the Royal Navy), until the even more powerful US Navy defeated it.

Second, there is very little reason to believe that the Chinese J-15 (what he erroneously calls the Su-33) outclasses the MiG-29K. We know of the problems with the Fulcrum because of things like a CAG audit whose findings have been made public. We have no such information about Chinese naval aviation, and we have no clue what issues they are facing. The serviceability of the J-15 could conceivably be worse. Further, it is also erroneous to assume that the aircraft is more capable than the MiG. Not only is the MiG’s avionics suite more advanced, its aerodynamic performance is superior too. If rumours are to be believed, Russian tests showed that the MiG-29K can haul more payload to a greater range than the Su-33/J-15 because it’s higher T:W ratio permits a higher take-off weight.

Third, assuming that “Chinese submarines are noisy and relatively crude” is just as meaningless as claiming that the J-15 is superior to the MiG-29K. China fields a larger number of Kilo-class boats the India does, and it stands to reason that their capabilities are roughly similar. The nuclear-powered Shang class subs may be noisier, but the very fact that they’re nuclear powered means that they can develop a threat to the Indian Navy in the IOR, while India’s diesel-electric boats are incapable of doing the same in the South China Sea. Plus, the nature of thermoclines in the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal makes ASW a particularly challenging affair. Such threats cannot be tackled effectively by other submarines – one needs a powerful surface fleet capable of launching airborne ASW missions at an aggressive rate to suppress them. This is quite difficult to do without a carrier fleet.

And lastly, I’d like to see a fleet of light frigates mount a challenge to an incoming Chinese carrier group and defeat it. The BrahMos might have range, but that range is useless without a robust airborne ISR system directing it. I know of no frigate that can organically generate a picture of the naval battle-space at long ranges. Carrier-borne aircraft are the only real assets capable of doing so. Without such aircraft, a Chinese fleet could easily outmaneuver and surprise an Indian fleet comprised of light frigates alone.

I understand that building a well-rounded fleet on a limited budget is extremely difficult, but the solution to that is to wisely allocate meagre resources to help achieve a set of well-articulated strategic goals. A one-dimensional fleet would only limit flexibility and hamstring the Navy against a creative opponent.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Viv S » 18 Mar 2017 05:55

^ Very very well put. :!:

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Neshant » 18 Mar 2017 07:00

Purchase policy of Indian navy favoring foreign planes damaging indigenous efforts at arms development

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9mA_LJP6Ao

Recently Indian Navy Chief, Admiral Sunil Lanba caused a flutter in the media by stating that TEJAS was “not yet up to the mark” and Navy would seek Aircraft from a foreign vendor. It’s not the first time that we are seeing our armed forces showing more interest to acquire imported weapons rather than domestically produced. We have already seen this in projects like Arjun MBT, TEJAS (IAF), Aakash Air defense Missile System and now TEJAS Navy. Our Armed forces have been less supportive of the Critical Indigenous projects.


When it comes to the fate of this project, the problem doesn’t only lie with our state-owned design agencies like ADA etc ,which are mostly blamed for missing deadlines, it has also got something to do with our armed forces. According to a report published in DNA in 2010, The then chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Nirmal Verma had expressed firm requirement of 50 TEJAS to replace the aging sea Harrier fleet of the IN. Navy was always aware that NP-1 and NP-2 would be technology demonstrators rather than the actual platforms.

Moreover CCS had sanctioned the development of TEJAS for navy in 2003 and in 2009 it gave go-ahead to the development of TEJAS Mk-2. After all these years of R&D , We have a new navy chief who, all of a sudden, feels that TEJAS is overweight and won’t meet Indian navy’s requirements even though the carrier trials of TD is yet to occur and final product is still under development. The question here is that why Navy couldn’t identify and outline its actual requirements during all these years? One can’t expect a light category fighter to carry a payload comparable to a Medium class fighter. TEJAS was always meant as a light aircraft and Tejas Mk 2 perfectly meets the payload requirement of it’s class.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Vivek K and 41 guests