Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

kit · Post by **kit** » 14 Jan 2018 04:06

Philip wrote:V.poor taste indeed and arrogance displayed.If the IN personnel are housed miles away from the base and dockyard,how on earth will they be able to
respond in time during an attack from the Pakis? Saying that the "navy must go to Pakistan" instead also betrays his woefuul knowledge of mil. matters.
Yes,by all mans Mr.minister,send them close to the Pakis so they can attack our warships and subs in a sneak attack.

Mr.Gadkari must spend a few days at sea with the navy to understand how it operates,especially on board a sub,but then he wouldn't be able to squeeeze through the hatch,neither can he be loaded through the torpedo tubes!

This is where our DM,NS must come forth boldly for the IN.She should take up the issue of naval housing with the PM and Maharashtra CM too. A jetty for fun and games somewhere between NP and Malabar hill can I'm sure be accommodated,but ensuring the security of the Indian coastline is the responsibility of the IN and CG.One cannot make crass jibes at the IN the way he has.An apology should be obtained.

Judge not a man by what he talks but what he does.

Granted being a public elected figure doesnt give one the right to talk any nonsense !

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jan 2018 05:05

Great night landing clip Adm.Raks! True, if the 29K's glitches have been sorted out there would be no need for a new fighter, esp. an SEF contender.Given a choice and if lifts were large enough, for argument's sake the F-18 is a better choice than a Sea Gripen. What the IN could do now that they've operated the 29Ks for quite some time is to suggest upgrades.An AESA radar for one and whether TVC engines would not impose any significant weight penalty.More composites, some conformal radars as on the FGFA and the ability to carry newer missiles, both AAM and ASM.When BMos-NG/L arrives, it will give the aircraft a huge capability and advantage over its rivals and expand the striking envelope of the carrier .This beggars a Q, is there going to be an air- launched version of Nirbhay? If we could do a " Brahmos" ASM, Nirbhay too should be a cinch! MIG-29Ks launching a 1500km Nirbhay at both sea and land targets would be a frightening prospect for the enemy.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 14 Jan 2018 22:13

twitter

jaysimha · Post by **jaysimha** » 14 Jan 2018 22:30

MANDATORY INFORMATION FOR UPLOADING RFI 6x NEXT GENERATION OFFSHORE PATROL VESSELS (NGOPVs)
FOR INDIAN NAVY

https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/sites/def ... NGOPVs.pdf

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 15 Jan 2018 05:22

kit wrote:
Philip wrote:V.poor taste indeed and arrogance displayed.If the IN personnel are housed miles away from the base and dockyard,how on earth will they be able to
respond in time during an attack from the Pakis? Saying that the "navy must go to Pakistan" instead also betrays his woefuul knowledge of mil. matters.
Yes,by all mans Mr.minister,send them close to the Pakis so they can attack our warships and subs in a sneak attack.

Mr.Gadkari must spend a few days at sea with the navy to understand how it operates,especially on board a sub,but then he wouldn't be able to squeeeze through the hatch,neither can he be loaded through the torpedo tubes!

This is where our DM,NS must come forth boldly for the IN.She should take up the issue of naval housing with the PM and Maharashtra CM too. A jetty for fun and games somewhere between NP and Malabar hill can I'm sure be accommodated,but ensuring the security of the Indian coastline is the responsibility of the IN and CG.One cannot make crass jibes at the IN the way he has.An apology should be obtained.
Judge not a man by what he talks but what he does. !

And it is also said, speak little and do much. Philip makes some good points.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Jan 2018 12:14

https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-01-15

The Navy has plans of buying 57 twin-engine fighter planes for the third aircraft carrier for which American F-18 and French Dassault Rafale are in the race. [SAD FOR F35 failing to show it is better for IN]

IMHO, the F18 would be a bad RFI from Umreeka

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jan 2018 12:18

It is somewhat similar to the 4 seniormost SC judges who preferably should've kept their criticisms of the CJI in house, or even if they had no sympathy from the CJI could've organised a meeting of all their fellow SC colleagues on the bench first, or even approached the President. If NG made his remarks to the IN privately thete would've been no controversy.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jan 2018 12:25

Saik, with the fund limitations there's little point in buying the aircraft now which can't even be used aboard the existing carriers, when even the design hasn't been finalised.All we know is that the IN want a 65K t CV with cats/ EMALS,which will take around 15 years to build nudging from the time we've taken for IAC-1.The fastest way to augment our CV fleet is another slightly larger sister ship of the new Vikrant with bigger lifts.If ordered now it could be in service with concerted effort by 2005- 2007.2 more large CVs could be built from 2005 onwards.Don't forget CV -X INS India which can operate the largest types of both land and carrier based birds, plus is unsinkable!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jan 2018 13:27

Quick titbit.Germany is to build for its Scandinavian clients Norway and Denmark ,4 U-212CDs,AIP subs for just $1.81B. That's around just $450M per sub.A late model Kilo or Amur would cost between $350-400M by comparison. Assuming it will cost around $2B with some added desi requirements, it will be far cheaper than any of our non- AIP Scorpenes costing just $500M/ boat.

I suggest that the GOI quickly seize the opportunity and negotiate with Germany a U-boat deal to replace our 4 U-209s and build at least 6 new ones.The P-75I req. can carry on as it will take years to select and seal the deal.In any case a new Ru sub to replace our Kilos can be sought post 2020.The upgrades planned ( 2 more at HSL) will keep them in service until 2030.The 6 P-75I subs are estimated at costing over $10+ B.That's well over $1B per sub.Buying German U-boats at half the price now would allow us to acquire much needed numbers at the earliest.2 bought outright 4-6 built at home.

The IN require at least 36-48 subs in the future to counter the Sino-Pak axis of evil which will possess jointly almost 200 subs.Pak alone will have 22 new Yuan boats plus around 4 older boats.16 in all.That's a huge number for such a country.With the Chinese naval base at Gwadar becoming operational, sub pens and facilities for Chinese carrier operations are also planned.Gwadar has one of the world's deepest harbours from where with UW sub pens, its subs can ingress and egress without surfacing.

Of our inventory, 12 will be SSBNs and SSGN/ SSNs.At least twice Park's inventory reqd.to sanitise the IOR and for forward deployment in the ICS.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Jan 2018 19:33

SaiK wrote:https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-01-15

The Navy has plans of buying 57 twin-engine fighter planes for the third aircraft carrier for which American F-18 and French Dassault Rafale are in the race. [SAD FOR F35 failing to show it is better for IN]

IMHO, the F18 would be a bad RFI from Umreeka

F-35C is a single engine aircraft and not yet operational which could have been one aspect of what the IN was looking for. It will be years before the F-35C achieves the maturity of the Super Hornet when it comes to Naval operations which it is not expected to begin aboard a CVN for another couple of years still after declaring IOC on land late this year.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2018 00:14

The news of 4 extra P-8Is is good going, plus the number of LRMP aircraft that the IN plans to acquire being 30.Now this is going to be a hugely expensive exercise as all 30 can't be P-8 Is.We operate 5 IL-38SDs too.These Sov. era birds have proven v.useful particularly for the low and slow ASW prosecution role.There are a few dozen new IL-38s mothballed in Russia.Another 3-7 could be acquired for a v.reasonable sum, while the balance could be supersonic Backfires equipped with KH series PGMs, BMos and Nirbhay.There is supposed to be a 600km BMos also planned.

With the retirement of the TU-142 Bear's, we lost a fantastic ultra long-range strat/ maritime bird whose capabilities can't be replicated by any of the exg. aircraft.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 16 Jan 2018 01:11

tsarkar ji,

Is INS Trata still operational? Despite the cable stayed bridge and tall civlian buildings near it?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2018 01:44

Philip wrote:Quick titbit.Germany is to build for its Scandinavian clients Norway and Denmark ,4 U-212CDs,AIP subs for just $1.81B. That's around just $450M per sub.A late model Kilo or Amur would cost between $350-400M by comparison. Assuming it will cost around $2B with some added desi requirements, it will be far cheaper than any of our non- AIP Scorpenes costing just $500M/ boat.

I suggest that the GOI quickly seize the opportunity and negotiate with Germany a U-boat deal to replace our 4 U-209s and build at least 6 new ones.The P-75I req. can carry on as it will take years to select and seal the deal.In any case a new Ru sub to replace our Kilos can be sought post 2020.The upgrades planned ( 2 more at HSL) will keep them in service until 2030.The 6 P-75I subs are estimated at costing over $10+ B.That's well over $1B per sub.Buying German U-boats at half the price now would allow us to acquire much needed numbers at the earliest.2 bought outright 4-6 built at home.

Thyssen Krupp is in financial trouble right now and its submarine deliveries are delayed and some suggest in jeopardy, with the yard requiring deep overhaul. The so-called good deal is likely because of the fiscal issues the firm has, speaking of which the risk factor for the IN is also larger.

More on this:
https://global.handelsblatt.com/compani ... ing-856111

German shipbuilder rapidly sinking
Cost overruns, long delays on a Turkish contract and a corruption scandal in Israel haunt the company.

Now, Thyssen Krupp's steel business is being merged with Tata. If Indian MOD was anywhere agile and not hobbled by rules and regulations to the eye-teeth, L&T would get funds to acquire TK's sub ops and we'd pay a fraction of what we'd pay on the open market for P75-I.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 16 Jan 2018 01:53

Cain Marko wrote:
kit wrote:
Judge not a man by what he talks but what he does. !
And it is also said, speak little and do much. Philip makes some good points.

+ 108. Just shows the national security apathy in even our 'best' politcians. We are having a discussion on what capabilities we need in 2.5 war scenario on another thread (2.5 war scenario thread) and I made the point that the 2nd most critical thing (after a public will to win) is to have leadership that understand military and national security issues and lo and behold here we see this.

Ramana sir - you see what I mean

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2018 02:32

^^ In the AF, they call it target fixation and some of our "best" politicians are so focused on their narrow ambit, they ignore everything to the contrary. So, Gadkari is focused on waterways, infra etc - all he wants is big results there. What the Navy is saying is "obstructionist" to him, without realizing they mean it from a very careful assessment of national security. This same attitude can be seen in many GOI depts. Even honest MOF babus will shy away from releasing funds to MOD, thinking it is a "waste" to spend it on bombs etc ("after all when was the last time we had a war"), then Kargil occurs.

I blame this on our idiotic fixation on fraudulent Gandhianism (self defeating pacificism) mixed with bad economic choices (always robbing peter to pay off paul because there is never enough funding) and finally a complete and total deracination (ignorance of indian history and what our ancestors suffered on invasion). I fully support rotating all MOF and MOD babus through Siachen etc and giving them specialized training on defence issues/technology to at least make them understand the amount of effort required to protect the nation and make things, both.

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jan 2018 02:41

The latest proposal for the third carrier. Including aircraft, it would be around $25B USD. Not a new story, it is just the latest in the IN’s regular schedule of intermittent trial balloons at MoD.

The numbers are tough at this point but the lead time needed for a carrier means they have to at least propose it now. The numbers will look better in the future as our economy grows. If we do not decide soon, it would mean a third carrier would not be a reality until way after 2030.

Our experience with the Vikrant began with MoD approval in 2003, keel laid in 2009, launch in 2013 (first of two) and fitting out to this day. So 15 years and counting.

The Vishal as a CATOBAR, regardless of EMALS or not, will be far larger and complicated so it can be expected to take at least as long. So a decision is needed soon or IACII will come very late. The PRC has clear plan and will conceivably have the Type 002 (already building in Shanghai as we speak) and the Type 003 by 2030. There are intelligence that they will build concurrently in mutiples for those CATOBAR classes. So possibly six carriers to our two unless we decide soon.

https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-01-15

Indian Navy plans to acquire its third aircraft carrier for a whopping Rs 1.6 lakh crore
Ajit Kumar Dubey
* New Delhi
* January 15, 2018
* UPDATED 15:05 IST

The Indian Navy is moving ahead with a big-ticket proposal for acquiring its third aircraft carrier which is expected to cost around Rs 1.6 lakh crore along with the additional component of 57 fighter aircraft.

The Navy has one operational aircraft carrier in the INS Vikramaditya while another one, INS Vikrant, is under construction at the Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL) and is expected to join service in the next few years.

...

“If one goes by the cost of the 36 Rafales acquired for the Air Force, the 57 planes are not going to cost us less than Rs 90,000-95,000 crore,” the sources said.

Citing the Chinese threat, the Navy had been asking for construction of the third nuclearpowered aircraft carrier using American technology and systems which is going to be far more expensive in comparison with the existing systems.

...

However, the defence ministry is not very keen on the project due to the high costs involved in it and it would force the government to change its acquisition plans for the coming years compelling it to wait list a number of other urgently required weapon systems of the Army and the Air Force, sources said.

The cost of equipment for the aircraft carrier take-off patented by an American private sector firm will also be a major factor in determining the final cost of the carrier for India, the sources said.

For buying the aircraft for the aircraft carrier, the Navy had floated a request for information (RFI) but it has not got any clearance from the defence ministry for issuing the tender for the project.

However, the Navy has already allowed the vendors to give it a presentation on whether their planes would be able to take off from the Russian-origin INS Vikramaditya or not. Defence ministry sources also said the need for further expanding the aircraft carrier fleet needs to be thought over again as all targets and routes in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) can be looked after well by the existing assets and bases in the area.

Due to this reason, the defence ministry had refused to clear the five-year programme of the Navy as agreeing to it would required at least doubling the current acquisition budget of the ministry.

John · Post by **John** » 16 Jan 2018 03:14

Philip wrote:The news of 4 extra P-8Is is good going, plus the number of LRMP aircraft that the IN plans to acquire being 30.Now this is going to be a hugely expensive exercise as all 30 can't be P-8 Is.We operate 5 IL-38SDs too.These Sov. era birds have proven v.useful particularly for the low and slow ASW prosecution role.There are a few dozen new IL-38s mothballed in Russia.Another 3-7 could be acquired for a v.reasonable sum, while the balance could be supersonic Backfires equipped with KH series PGMs, BMos and Nirbhay.There is supposed to be a 600km BMos also planned.

With the retirement of the TU-142 Bear's, we lost a fantastic ultra long-range strat/ maritime bird whose capabilities can't be replicated by any of the exg. aircraft.

Il-38 are hampered by lack of spares and updating them with Sea dragon costs 30 mill/each USD in 05 (likely more now probably around 70+ million). It took Russia years to update working Il-38 good luck upgrading mothballed ones. On the other hand A new P-8i cost about 250 mill.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2018 03:20

^^ I don't understand this fixation of upgrading platforms which don't have enough spares and supports for long term use.India's most bravest has an entire story on how an IL-38 entirely lost its power & literally all its onboard systems and was only saved by the completely dedicated & skilled IN crew onboard, preventing a disaster. The aircraft is clearly a problem to operate, and we should gracefully retire those platforms we cannot maintain.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2018 06:10

There are a few dozen of new IL-38s mothballed.Not old ones.Costwise too one can get at least 3-4 for the price of one P-8I.We can't afford all 30 LRMP aircraft to be of just one type.Secondly a turboprop is req. for the "low and slow" mission. We already operate 5 of them and adding another 4-5 would be a v.cheap solution instead of buying yet another similar type.This would give us around 20+ P-8Is/ IL-38s.These aircraft are also easier to operate/support than the erstwhile Bears.We do not have any type that can replace the Bears, with their enormous range, especially for LR strike.The Russians used them extensively in Syria and for frontline strat. bomber ops.

The remaining 8 could be upgraded Backfires.Again dozens are available and there has been this on and off interest from the IN.P-8Is cannot carry BMos only subsonic Harpoon for anti-ship missions.Harpoon is passe. BMos-NG/L is also some time away

Apart from the LRMP aircraft the IN and CG will require several maritime patrol/ ASW aircraft based upon the ATR/ C-295 types.With Pak's 16 plus at least 4 PLAN subs permanently in the IOR , we will have a v.tough time sanitising it.We may also have to have a naval/air base in Vietnam just as China has its own base at Gwadar.A forward presence is required to monitor PLAN )movements esp. those based at Hainan. Our LRMP aircraft will have to operate from the base in Vietnam too.

We must negotiate a lease agreement with Vietnam boldly ,just as Russia has done with Syria.Supplies of free/ subsidised mil eqpt. like BMos, SAMs like Akash and SAMs like Prahar, Prithvi,etc., available to the Viets as part of the lease deal. Milware could later expand to LCAs if it arrives in accelerated production.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Jan 2018 06:36

The Indian Navy strategy of marrying manned, heavy MPAs with cheaper and long loitering unmanned aircraft is now beginning to emerge with the request for the Sea Guardians. With time these drones will even begin to play in the anti-submarine mission as these payloads and capabilities are being designed as we speak. In between these two, the IN could very easily consider a sort of P-8 Lite based on the C295. In fact this should be taken up by one of the design teams with the intention to develop an Indian MPA payload using the C295 as the platform.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2018 06:40

Philip wrote:There are a few dozen of new IL-38s mothballed.Not old ones.Costwise too one can get at least 3-4 for the price of one P-8I.

If they are all so great, why are they mothballed? Why do you want India to fly obsolete junk which even the Russians don't want to fly beyond a point? Who supports these airframes tomorrow?
T-55s are mothballed in some Russian arms depot as well. Do you suggest we refurbish them and send them into battle.

Just because Russians used some sticks and stones in Syria or wherever does not mean we should rush down that path either. This is like the idee fixe of forcing MiG-35s on the IAF or some other stuff all the time.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2018 06:42

brar_w wrote:The Indian Navy strategy of marrying manned, heavy MPAs with cheaper and long loitering unmanned aircraft is now beginning to emerge with the request for the Sea Guardians. With time these drones will even begin to play in the anti-submarine mission as these payloads and capabilities are being designed as we speak. In between these two, the IN could very easily consider a sort of P-8 Lite based on the C295. In fact this should be taken up by one of the design teams with the intention to develop an Indian MPA payload using the C295 as the platform.

Exactly, the Sea Guardian + P8I will offer far better coverage than a handful of old IL-38s, with creaking mechanicals dating back to the 70s in design and p!ss poor uptime, which have to be updated with some Russian mission suite which is a hard fit in the cramped environs of the IL-38.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2018 10:32

The first Brazilian submarine project Scorpene transferred to the final assembly shop

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2018 12:51

They are very .much in use by the Run with a superior ASW package than the SD version on ours., Not junk by any means ,why the IN is still flying them! It was Ru policy to mass produce numbers in excess of needs so that at any time shortages could be met esp. during a crisis. We call them " war reserves" , which every air force supposedly have for such contingencies.

The Soviets and Russian philosophy is " safety in numbers", why they were able to defeat Nazi Germany outstripping them in tank production for one.There are also TU-95/142 Bears in mint condition waiting to be put into action if the balloon goes up.The Bears are in frontline service with the RuN, testing NATO''s defences regularly. Sea Guardian drones cannot carry heavy anti-ship sub weaponry like heavyweight torpedoes let alone BMos.These 4 engined turboprops have excellent range, endurance, loiter time, payload and are the Ru equiv. of P-3 Orions.P-8s too cannot carry BMos now being made even deadlier with the ER variants.

The IL-38s also cost far less than the P-8Is which cannot operate for long at low alts., required for sub hunting.That's why a special wing kit was developed for the P-8s ASW torpedoes . If we want to have 30 LRMP aircraft then a mix of types is necessary given the high cost of a P-8I.The IL-38s are also far superior in performance than maritime versions of med. sized aircraft like ATRs too. Secondly, after the retirement of the Bears we have no LR strike platform which can carry a significant weaponload like they did.There was some earlier attempt at IL-38s fitted onto BMos.Perhaps after the successful MKI test , we may see another attempt.

But what the IN also need are supersonic strat./ maritime LR strike aircraft like the Backfires which can v.rapidly reach the combat zone and unleash its arsenal of stand- off missiles like the 800km BMos ( supposed to be in the works) and 1500km Nirbhay LRCM.Blackjack upgrades and new production has been started, the first one about to be handed over, but these are far more expensive and meant to carry primarily Russia's airborne N-arsenal of the strat. triad.

vonkabra · Post by **vonkabra** » 16 Jan 2018 15:18

Austin wrote:INS Kalvari S-21 SSK's On-Board Systems & Fitments

Excellent find. Also confirms that the Scorpene's have a towed array sonar.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Jan 2018 15:50

Philip wrote:T...

The IN and the MOD will speak with their wallets and requirements when it comes to addressing this and adding more capability to the Maritime Surveillance enterprise. So far, the bets being made seem to be focused on MUM-T as an efficient means of covering this missions set. There are most certainly no requirements for long range supersonic bomber that carries an ALCM as you seem to be projecting regardless of what the Russian forces are capable of, and I suspect that may be because the threat and the doctrine is different for Russia and India.

and are the Ru equiv. of P-3 Orions.

Is this supposed to be a complement at a time when a lot many P-3 users are retiring that fleet and moving towards the P-8?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jan 2018 16:47

The C295 can fly at a maximum speed of 480km/h. The altitude during normal operations is 7,620m. The maximum takeoff weight is 23,200kg. The aircraft has an endurance of more than 11 hours and a maximum range of 5,630km.

----IL38 May
Maximum speed: 645[1] km/h (401 mph; 348 kn)
Ferry range: 7,500[1] km (4,660 mi; 4,050 nmi)
Endurance: 13 hours[1]
Service ceiling: 11,000[1] m (36,000 ft)

---
so while the May can carry more of a mission suite and more weapons & sonobuoys, the C295 can match it in most respects atleast 75% and would have a lot of uptime and future support advantage.

I have seen the May's parked in Goa airport. seemed like relics from the 1960s and really oddball with the radar on top.....we could build up a fleet of 50 C295 over a decade and use them for 4 decades...but its tough to imagine that for the Mays. I think russia too will go with some newer turboprop for their future LRMP platform.

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jan 2018 16:58

The first Brazilian submarine project Scorpene transferred to the final assembly shop

Sort of weird looking. Perfectly round and smooth like a Steely Dan.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jan 2018 17:20

^^ well the anechoic rubber layer is yet to be glued on. that will go in smoother...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2018 17:38

C-295s don't have the range for IOR ops. but are fine for CG reqs. The main reason for extra IL-38s is that we already operate 5 upgraded ones and another batch will keep us going at least upto 2030+ at low cost. Beyond that date a new platform will be required.New P-3 Orions aren't available only refurbished ones.The Mays are brand new.Modernised aircraft for the RuN have been recently delivered.With a top speed of 650kmh and a range of 9500km , plus the ability to carry virtually any type of ASW/ASM weaponry you can see the usefulness of the type.P-8Is and IL-38s give the IN an excellent capability with eqpt. and weaponry from both east and west.

Backfires with LRCMs and super/ hypersonic BMos essential for ICS ops and sanitising the choke points into the IOR.The PLAN CBGs must be dealt with before entering the IOR.Operating out of the A&N islands and from Viet base/s, PRC ports would be within range too.The absence of an LR strat. bomber esp. for the maritime reqs. will be acutely felt in the next decade.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 16 Jan 2018 18:43

Would be interesting to find out the timelines taken by India and Brazil in rolling out their respective Scorpene's.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 17 Jan 2018 01:58

First hand knowledge by speaking to an ex-CO of the bears squadron.
It used to take over 2 years to bring a trained aviator up-to speed on the bear where he/she could lead the mission.

Then when the officer resigned or moved onto civilian opportunities, the impact was more sharply felt than say a pilot from the VVIP squadron or even the IL-76 squadron.

The maritime mission is a lot tougher than any other mission. The P8 -- > IL-38 --> BEAR is expensive to maintain in that order.
Unmanned platforms are the way to go. The Whole world is headed that way.

As for the Il-38s. No thanks. They are an outdated old platform and as bad as the Nimrods.
No Thank you Phillip Sir.

The P-8 is based on a commercial platform so manufacturing is alive and so are the spare parts.
Nearly all the P-3 Operators are headed that way.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 17 Jan 2018 03:52

If Philip saar buys a Soviet era car from some mothballed warehouse in good 'ol Russia to replace his current vehicle, I'll support mothballed Il38 and Il76 induction in Navy and IAF. Actually he can get three or four for the price of one and if they run 1 and half day per week he would have most of the week covered.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jan 2018 07:29

$25B for a new carrier? People laughed at me when I estimated the cost to be around $15B.The IN will have to invest in a new crypto-currency and hope it flies high before we can afford such profligacy.

This brings me to the LRMP issue again.Regardless of the type used, " INS India " is unsinkable and can carry thousands of aircraft of varying types.LRMP aircraft which can carry real carrier-killer weapons (unlike Sea Guardians and other unmanned species, good for long-endurance surveillance), like Backfires, IL-38s and perhaps a new platform by 2025-2030,carrying BMos, both the 800km rang ER and Hyper to come,Nirbhay and other KH series of missiles that may be in our inventory, will be able to take the battle to the PLAN outside the IOR in the ICS itself.Unfortunately the P-8Is while excellent for sub-hunting cannot carry BMos.Harpoon is passe.So is Exocet.

The plan to acquire 30 LRMP aircraft is exciting but funds are scarce.It's why we have to have a mix of types both from the operational capability as well as the costs.But using the Indian landmass and islands as launching pads for supersonic Backfires armed with super/ hypersonic missiles, which none of the carrier fighters can do, will give the IN a far greater capability of destroying PLAN CBGs than the planned $25B flat top.At much lower cost too! The IN have a huge req . for ASW/multi-role helos for the surface ships over a dozen subs to come both conventional and nuclear.Spending so much money on one beast is simply asinine.

PS: My thoughts on extra IL-38s are for two reasons.They will allow us to prolong usage of the type, avoiding v.expensive replacements for another decade and that they can carry a meaningful load of weaponry and are available on the cheap.They will complement the far more expensive P-8Is in the "low and slow" prosecution of enemy subs as well as carry long range anti-ship missiles that a P-8I cannot.No Sea Guardian or UCAV can sink a carrier or major warship with its limited weaponry.The costs of P-8Is compel the IN to want only 4 more.Until a new LRMP turboprop platform arrives, and C-295s do not have a 9500km range able to wage war in the ICS nor carry BMos, we will need the IL-38s, why they've been upgraded.

We cannot allow the PLAN to ingress into the IOR from where they can disperse easily in its vast arena.The battle has to be taken to the dragon's backwaters, the Indo- China Sea.Forward logistic/ base facilities at a suitable Viet port must be obtained.If the Chins can squat in Gwadar we can do the same in Vietnam or elsewhere in the ICS.Remember how Yamamoto took the battle to Pearl Harbour first when war was inevitable.We have an added advantage of the choke points.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jan 2018 14:21

what kind of torpedoes and depth charges does our Mays carry?

it seems it fired a ASM only a year ago!!,
Tropex-17: Maiden anti-ship missile firing by IL-38 SD hits target By: By Our Defence Correspondent8 Feb 2017, 12:31 pm

Mumbai: Indian Navy said on Wednesday that the maiden anti-ship missile firing by llyushin 38 Sea Dragon (IL-38 SD) was successful.

According to officials, the IL 38 SD, a Long Range Maritime Reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft, carried out a successful anti-ship missile firing, ex-Goa.

This was part of the ongoing Theater level Readiness and Operational Exercise (Tropex-17). “The missile hit the target ship in the Arabian Sea,” says an official.
IL 38 SD aircraft has undertaken this maiden firing post modification and midlife upgrade.
“By successfully penetrating the target, the aircraft has demonstrated its highly potent anti-ship missile attack capability,” says the official.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jan 2018 14:38

Proves one of my points!

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 17 Jan 2018 15:18

Which missile was fired by IL 38, Uran, Club or .........BRAHMOS?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jan 2018 15:49

http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/20 ... ANssW1.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_C0MHEef3xPQ/T ... 5_Uran.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ks2009.jpg

said to be Uran. the midbody fins are folding

looks like 2 pylons total, one under each wing root.

the P8 carries 4 harpoons on wing pylons and upto 5 LWT is claimed in internal bay

http://www.b737.org.uk/images/p8farnborough.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3920/1498 ... 1874_b.jpg

the soviet navy must have used the Bear and May as pure play ASW, and relied on the large numbers of backfires for naval surface strike. the P8 is a hybrid.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jan 2018 16:38

Even a cursory look inside an IL-38 shows how cramped and ancient it is, with the new mission avionics basically sitting on an old, hard to sustain airframe. The crew will be tired, operating sub-optimally and managing all sorts of disparate tasks. A P-8 is light years ahead, which is why despite US holding back ISAR modes on radar etc, IN still wants more P-8s! Their uptime and overall capability will be higher.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Jan 2018 16:51

This link has details on IN/RuAN IL-38 with Sea Dragon configuration

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... -aircraft/