Indian Naval Aviation

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Jun 2017 20:37

You cited 5 times when it was deployed abroad in the last 19 years of its existence. A few hundred flights at max.

I live in an area where forests fires are so common that smoke is part of the weather forecast. At my local airport, I have seen atleast 10 kinds of firefighting aircraft, from air tractors to 146s to Hercules. When a forest fire is on. Each of these planes constantly takeoff, drop the retardants, and land. Each aircraft will do a few hundred trips every season.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 20 Jun 2017 21:15

Indranil wrote:You cited 5 times when it was deployed abroad in the last 19 years of its existence. A few hundred flights at max.

I live in an area where forests fires are so common that smoke is part of the weather forecast. At my local airport, I have seen atleast 10 kinds of firefighting aircraft, from air tractors to 146s to Hercules. When a forest fire is on. Each of these planes constantly takeoff, drop the retardants, and land. Each aircraft will do a few hundred trips every season.

Bang!

Just like the Tu-142 fleet did 30,000 hours during their entire service vs 10,000 hours by P-8I fleet since 2015.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jun 2017 21:21

unlike massa/canada where it can scoop water from many lakes we are not rich in lakes here.

however if its reliable and rugged we could use it as a littoral patrol a/c in concert with the MRMP thats been in the works for 10 yrs now without a deal. it can also drop and pickup marcos units near ships, oil rigs and coasts.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Sep 2017 11:34

Indian Navy Carrier Jet War Hots Up, Boeing Focuses Fire

Aug 28, 2017.

The Indian Navy’s multirole carrier borne fighter (MRCBF) contest just got a little hotter with Boeing today making it a point to amplify and detail the F/A-18E/F Block III Super Hornet’s ‘full compatibility’ with India’s current and future aircraft carriers. The company asserted today that the aircraft requires ‘no modifications’ to operate ‘with meaningful weapons loadouts’ from the ski-jump of the INS Vikramaditya, Vikrant-class and follow on aircraft carriers, adding a dimension of intrigue and intensity to a contest that is widely being seen as a direct dogfight with the Dassault Rafale. We’ll go into the significance of today’s comments in a moment, but first, here’s a quick video where we catch up with Boeing’s Vice President on the Super Hornet programme, Dan Gillian.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 02 Sep 2017 12:04

Philip wrote:The Beriev-200 was sev. air shows ago displayed,and water-bombed the runway. It is being used extensively even in western nations ,The current raging fire in Portugal has claimed almost 60 lives. The need for IN amphibs is acute,from the ASW.MRP role alone. A small batch of 6-8 could be acquired at far lower cost than US-2s,which could even operate very successfully in the A&N theatre,linking all the various islands that we possess increasing the opportunity of developing them further from the security point of view.

This again? You know Philip, at a certain point you're just trolling the thread.

As I pointed in the previous time you posted this, and the time before, and the time before, the Be-200's rated for a wave height of 1.2 m which makes operating in the IOR a non-starter at most times of the year.

And the idea there is a need for an amphibious aircraft for anti-submarine warfare, let alone an 'acute' need, is absurd. Unless we want it to be a 'sporting affair' with the submarine given a fair chance to fight back - using its torpedoes to 'sink' the hunting aircraft. The phrase 'sitting duck' originates from a very similar situation.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Sep 2017 05:48

MiG eyes deal to supply military jets to Navy

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 720725.cms

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 19 Sep 2017 13:21

If IN wants to expand carrier aviation in pre 2030 timeframe, the best bet is to:

1. Order second Vikrant class carrier

2. Order at least 1 more squadron of MiG-29K.

3. Purchase second hand sea kings asap, along with some new dhruvs.

4. Order 2-4 more Ka-31

Assuming there are 2/3 carriers are available at any time, and 2/4 squadrons of MiGs are flying, you could at least ensure 1 squadron worth operationally deployed on each ship.

Possibiliy LCH could be developed into a naval variant for operations against Somali pirate type threats.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Sep 2017 13:36

ADmitted that the US-2 can operate in 3m high waves,much better than the 1M Beriev.However,look at the cost factor too.One US-2 costs well over $100M There are many tasks that a less wave ht. capable amphib can perform.Secondly,even at that price,the US-2 comes with zilch anti-sub eqpt. This is my biggest grouse. What great sea state req. justifies such an expensive amphib buy when it cannot prosecute subs which are the most dangerous threat to the IN now and n the future? For the second time this yr. a Chinese sub has docked at a Malaysian port.The visits are going to only increase.The US-2s unarmed and without anti-sub sensors like MAD,etc.will be totlaly useless

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 19 Sep 2017 15:16

Philip Sir, what is the primary role for which the aircraft is being acquired.. is it SAR or ASW ?

Some pages back you were pushing for the Be-200s to take on the role of the P8I and now here you are saying are better than the US-2s

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 19 Sep 2017 15:53

Rakesh wrote:MiG eyes deal to supply military jets to Navy
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 720725.cms

MiG is China's 'assassin's mace' for India.

chola · Post by **chola** » 19 Sep 2017 16:37

Cosmo_R wrote:
Rakesh wrote:MiG eyes deal to supply military jets to Navy
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 720725.cms
MiG is China's 'assassin's mace' for India.

LoL.

Actually not really so funny if we end up getting MiG-35 for the "single" engine fighter because of FGFA and more 29Ks for the Navy's 57 tender

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 01 Oct 2017 00:33

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... hter-18875

The possible upgrades evisioned on the f-18 super hornet, Not sure how much would be offered to us if we were to choose this platform

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Oct 2017 02:21

Philip wrote:ADmitted that the US-2 can operate in 3m high waves,much better than the 1M Beriev.However,look at the cost factor too.One US-2 costs well over $100M There are many tasks that a less wave ht. capable amphib can perform.

B.S. If it cannot operate in the IOR, as far as the ICG & IN are concerned, it is useless.

Secondly,even at that price,the US-2 comes with zilch anti-sub eqpt. This is my biggest grouse.

A grouse based on damn silly premise. An amphibious aircraft is meant for amphibious tasks. An ASW aircraft is meant for ASW missions. The IN bought P-8I for ASW and will complement them with C-295 based MRMPs. You may as well start complaining about how limited they are because they can't land as sea (not that the Be-200 can either - not in our waters anyway, for most of the year).

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 01 Oct 2017 03:27

Eric Leiderman wrote:http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... hter-18875

The possible upgrades evisioned on the f-18 super hornet, Not sure how much would be offered to us if we were to choose this platform

Lets set the tabloid and the particular author aside. The USN, and virtually the entire global fighter market has been luke warm at best to Boeing's advanced features. Only ones they are interested in are the ones that are practical and that enhance its complementary capability to 5th gen aircraft with the Navy and AF. Things such as giving it enough legs to actually keep up with the F-35C, and then giving it enough bandwidth so that it can pass on data between larger platforms, farther out and the F-35C that will be more of a penetrative attack platform. Even the USN CNO has set a direct comparison aside and made it a point to mention the complementary capability and ways to make the SH more relevant, alongside the F-35C in future USN Fleet.

https://youtu.be/PWSD5b0BeEI?t=1473

Dave has always toyed about bringing in the Growler to the debate which is irrelevant. The Growler supports the Joint Forces and is a tactical platform of strategic importance. It just so happens to share an airframe with the SH but that is it. There is no, Buy SH and get a Growler for free scheme that Boeing is pushing at this moment so it is irrelevant.

Now as far as the IN is concerned it comes down to a matter of choice, with the MiG-29K being the most obvious one so the INs interest in looking at an alternative (besides LCA-N) seems to suggest they want to hedge against the issues with that enterprise. It then becomes a better of risk, cost and choice with carrier compatibility playing the deciding factor. Unfortunately, besides the Naval LCA there is really no aircraft that is specifically designed around the Indian carriers (outside of Mig29K) so it would depend upon the cost of fitting something in which as things pertain to the SH likely means taking things out (reducing weight and/or increasing thrust) and not adding bulk by adding features that will come with a performance penalty.

bahdada · Post by **bahdada** » 01 Oct 2017 16:41

Carrier Ops - Night VIsion clip USS GW out of Norfolk.

https://vimeo.com/216209809

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Oct 2017 17:13

Great $100M a pop amphibs for merely SAR! Historically,amphibs were also used for ASW.These will be great white sea elephants instead of buying the sorely needed ASWhelos. Moreover,much smaller amhibs/seaplanes have been operating in the IOR for decades.Just visit the Maldives for a start.Sri Lanka too have been using seaplanes for decades,operating from ports,lakes,reservoirs,etc. 35 years ago I watched one operating off a resort.There is nothing that says that ONLY a US-2 can operate in the IOR!

Have just been going through the good CNS' recent statements reg. the second carrier,aircraft etc. The idea is to select the aircraft for carrier 3 well in advance given our prolonged selection,deal-sealing timeframe,and expect the carrier in a decade+,closer to 2030.To quote him,"ASW helicopters,submarines and minesweepers are urgently needed...".Now there is an Israeli USV,which is meant for MCM duties.However,it can also be equipped with ASW torpedoes. MCM vessels have powerful sonars,towed sonars,UUVs too, meant to detect small mines,some of which may even be non-magnetic,difficult to detect. These vessels could be designed to also possess some ASW capability ( carry upto 4 torpdoes,maybe even an MBU) and augment ASW assets.esp. for coastal duties.I've said before that the CG should also be trained for MCM/ASW duties to increase the number of vessels for such tasks during a crisis.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Oct 2017 17:38

Philip wrote:Great $100M a pop amphibs for merely SAR!

That the US-2 is expensive and not a priority doesn't make your advocacy for the Be-200, designed to operate from lake waters & placid seas, any less nonsensical.

Historically,amphibs were also used for ASW.

Welcome to 2017. There are conventional fixed wing platforms available for ASW and they work just fine.

Nobody in the Navy has ever complained about not being able to land a P-8 or Il-38 on the water.

These will be great white sea elephants instead of buying the sorely needed ASWhelos.

Who said anything about not buying helos? Nobody has disputed the fact that the US-2 ought to be a low-priority issue. But we're talking about the loony amphib-for-ASW & Be-200-for-India ideas.

Moreover,much smaller amhibs/seaplanes have been operating in the IOR for decades.Just visit the Maldives for a start.Sri Lanka too have been using seaplanes for decades,operating from ports,lakes,reservoirs,etc. 35 years ago I watched one operating off a resort.There is nothing that says that ONLY a US-2 can operate in the IOR!

Smaller amphibs have been operating in littoral areas not in rough oceanic waters (the Indian Navy is not in the tourism business). And with a rated wave height of 1.2 m, the Be-200 is unfit for operations in the IOR, plain & simple.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Oct 2017 18:53

The point I'm making is that a US-2 without any ASW capability at a staggering price of over $100M a pop is a ridiculously expensive option merely for SAR.There's also Bombardier's CL-415 which is 1/3rd the cost. Is every amphib op. going to be in wave heights of 3M? MOst of the time the amphibs will be taking off and landing from the waters adjunct to our ports and naval bases.There is no need to buy for a huge cost of $1.2B+ only US-2s.A smaller number ,say 3-4 could be bought with at least a dozen Bombardiers or Berievs,giving the IN around 16 amphibs for the same price,saving $3-4B in the bargain! The operating costs/hr will also be cheaper if we have a second amphib type in large number.

One must ask the Q whether 3m high waves are found (always) only in the IOR? Had that been the case,the Canadians,Russians,etc. would not have designed their amphibs for lower wave heights.The 3M wave height is certainly a useful capability,but this entire deal looks to me just like the AW VVIP helo scandal where the alt. of the helo was allegedly determined to suit the AW helo. The need of the hour is ASW helos,MCMs and subs-as spelt out by the navy chief.The US-2 deal is almost entirely political.A gimmick like the Bullet Train to showcase the Indo-Japanese relationship which can be equally finessed through other methods.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 01 Oct 2017 19:54

Philip wrote:The point I'm making is that a US-2 without any ASW capability at a staggering price of over $100M a pop is a ridiculously expensive option merely for SAR.

Its also being offered without any AWACS capability, and gunship capability, and tanking capability and ISTAR capability. Merely does what its designed to do.

There's also Bombardier's CL-415 which is 1/3rd the cost.

And carries less than 1/10th of the US-2's payload.

~1 ton for the CL-415 versus 13 tons for the US-2.

Is every amphib op. going to be in wave heights of 3M? MOst of the time the amphibs will be taking off and landing from the waters adjunct to our ports and naval bases. There is no need to buy for a huge cost of $1.2B+ only US-2s.A smaller number ,say 3-4 could be bought with at least a dozen Bombardiers or Berievs,giving the IN around 16 amphibs for the same price,saving $3-4B in the bargain! The operating costs/hr will also be cheaper if we have a second amphib type in large number.

All our ports and most of our naval bases have proper airstrips. The aircraft is being considered for SAR duties.

The Be-200 with its 1.2 m wave height limitation CANNOT by used in the IOR for most of year. Well.. maybe in the Arabian Sea in the winter months. In the monsoon season, it can't even operate from the littoral areas & ports.

Reducing, delaying or shelving the US-2 order is one thing, but the Be-200 will still remain a nonsensical proposal.

One must ask the Q whether 3m high waves are found (always) only in the IOR? Had that been the case,the Canadians,Russians,etc. would not have designed their amphibs for lower wave heights.

The Russian, Italians, Portuguese etc. have been using the Be-200 for fire-fighting. And the aircraft does its scooping from lakes, dams and similar placid water bodies. The US-2, in contrast, was designed for SAR missions in less-than-calm waters.

If the Ministry of Environment & Forests issues an RFI for a fire-fighting aircraft, sure the Be-200 can be an option. Can be the leading option, if you like. The Navy however has no interest in it and for good reason.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 02 Oct 2017 09:52

US-2 for any other role (ASW, logistics and etc) than special insertion and extraction around IOR Island territories is a sub-optimal usage of money. It will be nice if a large Zodiac with ordinance/equipment/supplies can be offloaded at will around the ocean's islands. Adds some flexibility in monitoring and taking action against hostile elements. It is the naval equivalent of super-herky

The Russian equivalent is not suitable for Indian conditions for 3 seasons at sea

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Oct 2017 12:20

The monsoons affect each coast at diff. times.When the NE monsoon is active,its calm seas in the Bombay west coast region. Same with the SE monsoon. During monsoons,even the activity of merchant shipping,ferries,etc. are reduced,should the weather deteriorate substantially. We have an enormous opportunity for operating amphibs,smaller seaplanes all along our coast,islands,etc.We have at the moment zilch for fire fighting.Amphibs which can operate only at wave heights below 3m like the US-2 can land safely in protected harbour waters. There is a huge are of water at the Karwar base from where any amphib can operate from.They could even take off from the backwaters/rivers adjunct to the sea.I've said before,a smaller buy of US-2s for the worst weather conditions is fine.For other duties,there are other options which could include an ASW capability.With an excellent inventory of heavy-lift transports,the IAF can easily transport large amts. of supplies to the air bass in the islands from where smaller boats can deliver them to the req. spots. In any case,most supplies would be sent to the established naval bases for supporting the logistic chain of ships,aircraft and subs,which would use these facilities.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 03 Oct 2017 17:46

Sirs, would this help ?

Wave Characteristics and Climate variability in the Indian Ocean

Apparently data collected/measured a decade ago but might still be good. Don't know about the accuracy. Seems to be a study/project by IIT students... and a Russian physicist

shravanp · Post by **shravanp** » 03 Oct 2017 18:41

Cosmo_R wrote:
Rakesh wrote:MiG eyes deal to supply military jets to Navy
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 720725.cms
MiG is China's 'assassin's mace' for India.

The RFI by the Indian Navy says the aircraft required by it should be day-and-night capable, all-weather, multi-role, deck-based combat aircraft which can be used for air defence, air-to-surface operations, buddy refuelling, reconnaissance etc. from IN aircraft carriers".

That's quite a tough requirement.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 03 Oct 2017 19:18

Manish_P wrote:Sirs, would this help ?

Wave Characteristics and Climate variability in the Indian Ocean

Thank you. Posting from that -

Monthly average variation of significant wave height, Hs (m)* for the period January 1993 to December 2010.

-------------------

Any reasonable individual should be to tell from the graph above that an aircraft like the Be-200 with a 1.2 m wave height limitation is utterly unsuitable for SAR missions in the IOR.

But its a Russian aircraft, so Philip will continue to insist that we can fly it from rivers, lakes, lagoons, backwaters, etc. and emphasise how useful it'll be for fire-fighting & tourism.

arun · Post by **arun** » 12 Dec 2017 18:34

X Posted from the Indian Navy News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016 thread.

THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER IN INDIAN NAVAL DOCTRINE : Assessing the Likely Usefulness of the Flattop in an Indo-Pakistani War Scenario :

US Naval War College

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 13 Dec 2017 03:24

shravanp wrote:
The RFI by the Indian Navy says the aircraft required by it should be day-and-night capable, all-weather, multi-role, deck-based combat aircraft which can be used for air defence, air-to-surface operations, buddy refuelling, reconnaissance etc. from IN aircraft carriers".

That's quite a tough requirement.

The only tough part about that is being able to operate from IN aircraft carriers. The issues with the limited width of aircraft elevators on both the Vikramaditya and Vikrant have been discussed here. We know the Mig-29k and NLCA have no problems with it. IN is trying to find out if anyone else has a solution by which their aircraft can get around the limitation.

My humble opinion is that they will have to eventually choose more Mig-29Ks.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 13 Dec 2017 03:27

Mod Note:

Viv S, if you want to respond to Philip's posts, do so without name-calling and personal attacks. Better yet, put him on your ignore list. This constant tu-tu-main-main between you two on multiple threads gets tiresome. Further posts calling him a troll or liar or talking about his preference for Russian equipment etc. will attract warnings.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 Dec 2017 08:13

India puts forward new plan to buy helicopters after ending talks with Lockheed
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/ ... -lockheed/

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2017 13:14

Viv,Spice jet is acquiring over 100 seaplanes for commercial services and the PM just took a ride in one.Pray do they have 3M wave sea state capability? When I first brought up the need well over a decade ago,I mentioned the Maldives in particular where there are dozens of seaplanes being used as air taxis,taking the tourists to their various island resorts. Sri Lanka also use seaplanes extensively.They have a string of naval bases,ports,lakes,backwaters,rivers,etc. and they suffer from two monsoons and cyclones every year too experiencing far greater rainfall and weather/sea conditions than many parts of India! None of their seaplanes have 3m wave capabilities. Amphibs would be of great help in the A&N islands and Lakshadweep where it is far easier to move people around using the sea,as airstrips can't be built in large number because of the environmental concerns.For the better part of the year,conditions the seas on both coastlines and island territories are good enough for BE-200 ops. In fact every island could be connected faster using seaplanes instead of ships and ferries.

We have many rivers,reservoirs and lakes where the bird can also be operated from for both passr. and from the fire-fighting viewpoint. Forest fires are destroying many places around the globe.The recent California fires destroyed an area larger than New York and Boston! Given the v.high cost of US-2s and impracticality of building them here with so few reqd. ,it would be prudent to acquire a small batch 6-8 which can operate in severe sea conditions,plus a similar batch ,much cheaper for regular and coastal duties,which also have these fire-fighting capabilities.There has been a 30% surge in forest fries this yr. alone.A 2014 report said that we were losing 1M hectares alone each yr!
http://www.firstpost.com/india/30-surge ... 75870.html
For passr. commercial services,there are several variants of seaplanes/amphibs from various manufacturers which would give an improved connectivity using waterbodies instead of congested airports.These especially useful for connecting smaller towns and cities which do not have a high passr. requirement for air travel.It would hugely improve tourist traffic.Imagine a seaplane service from BLR's HAL lake to Hampi 340+ km away,taking about 5-6+ hrs. depending upon traffic,and landing on the Tungabhadra instead of the tiresome hours of road travel! The aircraft could then fly onto Goa landing on the Mandovi. It takes 6-7 hrs to reach Goa by road from Hampi nother 300+ km away.

I am trying to be objective here. "Horses for courses".The US-2 is great for specific ops but overkill and far too expensive for other duties and operations where other amphibs and seaplanes can do better and cheaper too.

PS:If whatever glitches are there on the 29Ks,resolved with a service centre.support entity being set up in India for most Sov./Ru wares,extra 29Ks,perhaps to an improved std. with AESA radars,TVC engines,etc. as on the MIG-35s,plus BMos-L/NG capable,would be the most cost-effective and capable choice. A lot depends upon the 29Ks ease of ops and rectifying defects. An interesting point to note.In the IN's annual warship performance contest,the VikA came second with a Talwar class FFG first!

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 14 Dec 2017 15:40

Philip wrote:Viv,Spice jet is acquiring over 100 seaplanes for commercial services and the PM just took a ride in one.Pray do they have 3M wave sea state capability?

Would that be because commercial sea-planes do takeoffs and landings from shallow coastlines (in seas and occeans) or placid waters (in lakes and rivers) and not in the middle of the rough seas - as might be required for SAR missions ?

Genuine question

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 14 Dec 2017 16:04

Manish_P wrote:
Philip wrote:Viv,Spice jet is acquiring over 100 seaplanes for commercial services and the PM just took a ride in one.Pray do they have 3M wave sea state capability?
Would that be because commercial sea-planes do takeoffs and landings from shallow coastlines (in seas and occeans) or placid waters (in lakes and rivers) and not in the middle of the rough seas - as might be required for SAR missions ?

Genuine question

^ Wouldn't Spice jet me making a ton of revenue from picking up and dropping passengers in the middle of the Ocean, in choppy waters?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 14 Dec 2017 16:28

^ Ah of course. I forgot there was a huge market for that untapped segment of intrepid travellers

Although i expected it to be mostly in the seas off Europe

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Dec 2017 08:00

Spicejet could operate such services all along our coastline as well in the islands just as the seaplanes have been doing in the Maldives and SL for years.There are so many ports, towns by the sea which do not have air connectivity.A close friend who has interests in Porbandar complained that the commercial 737 flight from Bombay had been cancelled .A smaller seaplane with far lesser passengers could do the biz.

No aircraft of any type operate in really bad cyclonic weather barring those equipped for scientific study of hurricanes, etc.These smaller seaplane types, water taxis if you like, would ensure communications where no airstrips exist with their
increased requirements of runways, hangars, etc.A seaplane simply uses the existing sea as its landing ground.A jetty is all that is needed plus a small office/ departure lounge on land.Most of the year the weather is decent and fit for std. amphib ops.Protected coves and small bays identified for operations. The US-2s were designed for Pacific requirements.We need a variety of amphibs/seaplane for varied requirements as mentioned in earlier posts esp. for fire fighting The entire globe is being severely affected by forest fires drastically reducing our forest cover and affecting climate change.

For the mil. role, our $100M US-2s would be relatively useless if not equipped for ASW.Just used in an SAR role they would be hugely expensive beasts.Us-2s BE-200s, Bombardier,etc. to be used by the CG and IN in particular must have ASW sensors, sonobuoy capability, torpedoes and depth charges, etc.This is the problem that Japan is trying to overcome with its pacifist constitution, selling mil. eqpt.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 15 Dec 2017 12:19

Philip wrote:Spicejet could operate such services all along our coastline as well in the islands just as the seaplanes have been doing in the Maldives and SL for years.There are so many ports, towns by the sea which do not have air connectivity.A close friend who has interests in Porbandar complained that the commercial 737 flight from Bombay had been cancelled .A smaller seaplane with far lesser passengers could do the biz.

Yes Spicejet can..and so can other commercial airlines. But i thought the discussion here was about the Indian Navy. Or are you suggesting that the IN send it amphib to ferry passengers if a commercial flight to a port city is canceled ?

Philip wrote:We need a variety of amphibs/seaplane for varied requirements as mentioned in earlier posts esp. for fire fighting The entire globe is being severely affected by forest fires drastically reducing our forest cover and affecting climate change.

Again, do you want the IN to take up the job of fire-fighting ?

Well if the Indian Army is called on to build a FOB at a railway station in the richest municipality in the country, then why not

Philip wrote:For the mil. role, our $100M US-2s would be relatively useless if not equipped for ASW.

I thought the P-8i were bought for the ASW role.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Dec 2017 14:15

P-8Is cannot land on water! In WW2 seaplanes/amphibs were extensively used for ASW.In fact,seaplanes used to land on the lake behind HAL in BLR.WE ant more ASW aircraft,LRMP,medium sized,etc. for both the IN and CG.A part of that req. could be with amphibs.

Moving personnel,troops,eqpt.,etc. in island territories by sea takes time.Seaplanes would do the job much faster.In SL,the SLAF have often operated helos,etc. for commercial flights.One is not advocating a full-fledged commercial service by the In,Spicejet can do the biz,but for swifter communications,in such regions,seaplanes are much more effective.The services must possess their own.Right now it is being done with aging helos,some more than 30 yrs. old. Why the LUH req. has emerged.The IAF has its commns. sqds.Pegasus based at Delhi.The IN has its INAS 321 (Angels) for SAR/Commns.at Goa,Used in Antarctica too.If you examine the disposition/location of the naval bases,ports,etc. on both coastlines,one will find that few have airports/airstrips let alone ferry services! The main route of access is by road.Seaplanes/amphibs linking them with ease,with the least amount of infrastructure costs,would usher in a revolution in connectivity in both military and civilian
spheres. I've given the huge annual loss of forest cover due to firs and the area increases each year.We don't have a single firefighting aircraft for a country as large as ours. With a negative attitude it amounts to a latter-day Nero fiddling while Indian forests burn!

Spicejet is bang on target with its seaplane acquisitions,and it is possible someone there has been checking into BRF,who knows!

Using $100M US-2s merely for SAR duties as said before is asinine.They must be equipped for the ASW role.We require a variety of amphibs and smaller seaplanes for the tasks that each category does best."Sea-horses for courses"! My suggestion is that the IN/CG buy the foll. amphibs/seaplanes,smaller qtys. of the larger two amphibs and a few doz. of the same seaplanes that Spicejet is acquiring so that O&M would be easier. I don't think that the MOD would want to outsource mil ops as is being done in the US worldwide!

PS:Costs fofvarious amphibs
US-2 cost reported offer for India.$1.3B for just 12.Works out to $100M+ per aircraft.

BE-200 (72 passr. capacity) BE-220 is the maritime patrol variant.Indonesia wanted two for $40M.

Bombardier amphib deal for Spicejet. 50 aircraft for $400M with a total of 100 planned.These 10-14 seaters cost just $4M a pop.

PPS:An argument may be made using helos instead which can land on helipads at these locations. Cost of 48 MI-17s latest order, $1.%B.That makes each helo about $40-50M.A 12 passr. Dhruv costs about $6.%M.The Bombardier seaplane,same capacity is 50% cheaper than Dhruv and operating costs would also be cheaper. In the search for missing fishermen in the aftermath of the cyclone that hit TN recently,where approx. 800 are still missing according to some sources,seaplanes would've been particularly useful in the SAR mode,even the smaller Bombardiers.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 15 Dec 2017 14:42

Philip wrote:P-8Is cannot land on water! In WW2 seaplanes/amphibs were extensively used for ASW.

Are you saying that for ASW it is necessary to land on water

Philip wrote:Moving troops,eqpt.,etc. in island territories by sea takes time.Seaplanes would do the job much faster.

Agree with you

Philip wrote:In SL,the SLAF have often operated helos,etc. for commercial flights.One is not advocating a full-fledged commercial service by the In,

SLAF is much smaller than the IAF but no harm in following good practices. However IMHO with the size of our economy i think we can have a dedicated service or a dedicated branch within a service to take care of the logistics operations.

Philip wrote:I've given the huge annual loss of forest cover due to firs and the area increases each year.We don't have a single firefighting aircraft for a country as large as ours. With a negative attitude it amounts to a latter-day Nero fiddling while Indian forests burn!

Again IMHO it is better that the IN be left (and given the means) to take of their primary duties. Other entities need to step up/ be upgraded/be established to take care of things like firefighting, tourism, cargo etc

Philip wrote:Using $100M US-2s merely for SAR duties as said before is asinine.They must be equipped for the ASW role.

I would also love to have multirole aircraft. However you will know better than me that all multirole aircrafts are basically compromises. If you are a jack of all trades... as the saying goes

Philip wrote:We require a variety of amphibs and smaller seaplanes for the tasks that each category doies best."Sea-horses for courses"!

So please suggest a good aircraft, having the necessary range and endurance, to do the role of SAR in the indian ocean, the arabian sea and the bay of bengal wherein average wave heights fluctuate between 1 to 3 mtrs (charts provided earlier in the thread)

Philip wrote:BE-200 (72 passr. capacity) BE-220 is the maritime patrol variant.Indonesia wanted two for $40M. Bombardier amphib deal for Spicejet. 50 aircraft for $400M with a total of 100 planned.These 10-14 seaters cost just $4M a pop.

Can either of them land/takeoff in wave height between 1 to 3 mtrs

Philip wrote:An argument may be made using helos instead which can land on helipads at these locations.

Do they have the range to conduct SAR missions deep in the indian ocean, the arabian sea and the bay of bengal

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Dec 2017 14:52

Not suggesting that the P-8Is need to take a 'seabath" to hunt for subs!

,but amphibs as mentioned can land anywhere they choose ,not being limited by airstrips like conv. aircraft/P-8Is. Greater capability when based in the islands.

I've given 3 types which we could acquire.US-2s in limited qty. (say 4-6)for the IN,but with ASW eqpt. and weaponry,meaningless otherwise for such a high price for only SAR.BE-220s for the med. maritime role,ASW plus SAR,plus firefighting duties,as it is being used extensively around the world,proven record (8-12).
Smaller Bombardiers for commns. duties,larger no. reqd. as we'd be operating them from bases/ports from Kutch to Kanyakumari down the western coast and from Kanyakumari to Kol. on the east coast.Then there are Lakshadweep and the A&N islands.Exact numbers should be worked out but I would guess that at least 24 would be reqd. for the CG and IN,perhaps more.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 15 Dec 2017 15:37

Philip wrote: I've given 3 types which we could acquire.US-2s in limited qty. (say 4-6)for the IN,but with ASW eqpt. and weaponry,meaningless otherwise for such a high price for only SAR.

Ok. So your contention is that the price is just too high for only SAR. Fair enough. It has to be negotiated downwards, which i believe is what the GOI is doing.

Now what are the other options - for the specific role of SAR - which can operate in the seas where the average wave height tends to be more than 1 mtr (and incidentally are going to get even higher considering your points of Global warming/Climate change)?

Consider the recent episode of the Argentine submarine. God forbid that an indian sub is stricken far in the indian ocean and the crew need rescuing, would you still say that the price for rescuing them is just too high. Let's just have other aircraft (smaller perhaps, cheaper perhaps), but which cannot land in those waves, just keep those poor submariners company by playing music and waving their wings, until the IN ships arrive to rescue them..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Dec 2017 16:00

Sub rescue is another matter altogether.It isn't the equiv of rescuing the crew of a merchantman in distress.The DSRVs have to be transported to the location.The two we're getting from Britain can be transported by our heavylifters , not enough info whether US-2s can do so.
How often will such emergencies take place and at what depths of water too?

But the point is get a smaller no.You will still have the reqd. capability.I can't see v.much being cut on the price by the Japanese. Use the money saved to get the two other types , much cheaper and in larger numbers so that they can be located at more numerous locations as mentioned.

Anyway, enough time spent on this one subject.I think we've almost exhausted the major points to be covered.Ultimately it will all depend upon the cost of the package.[
.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 15 Dec 2017 16:14

Philip wrote:Sub rescue is another matter altogether.It isn't the equiv of rescuing the crew of a merchantman in distress.The DSRVs have to be transported to the location.The two we're getting from Britain can be transported by our heavylifters , not enough info whether US-2s can do so.
How often will such emergencies take place and at what depths of water too?

But the point is get a smaller no.You will still have the reqd. capability.I can't see v.much being cut on the price by the Japanese. Use the money saved to get the two other types , much cheaper and in larger numbers so that they can be located at more numerous locations as mentioned.

Anyway, enough time spent on this one subject.I think we've almost exhausted the major points to be covered.Ultimately it will all depend upon the cost of the package.[
.

Not so fast Sir. I didn't specify that it is a submerged sub rescue. Consider it to be a surface rescue. It could be a sub, ship, plane whatever..

We certainly have spent a lot of time on this subject but one of the most important point is still not addressed satisfactorily - 'Which other aircraft/s are able to land in the average wave heights (between 1 to 3 meters) seen in the indian waters so that they can conduct SAR operations'