Indian Naval Aviation

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.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2977
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby tsarkar » 13 Jun 2020 12:52

Prem Kumar wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/KSingh_1469/status/1271167117132550146?s=20 ---> “Listen to the experts” we are told well here is THE expert on HAL helicopters. He’s flown them all including the latest ALH MK.3 and LUH. The ex-navy TPs who were quoted this week all admit they haven’t even seen a MK.3 up close let alone flown in one.

Image


Here's the opinion piece from WingCo Bhambhani that the tweets refer to. He doesn't mince words when he says that the Navy's NUH specs are intentionally designed to keep ALH/LUH out. Balanced article, that says both the Navy and HAL must set aside past differences and sit down to work things out.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2020/06/navy-dhruv-spat-lets-stop-fighting-hal-test-pilot-says.html


One of the reasons naval aviators are very upset is because for the 16 ALH Mk3 on order for Indian Navy, HAL never suggested segmented blades, folding tail or any improvements.

BTW K Singh 1469 is absolutely ignorant & dishonest when he says "HAL can meet required NUH stowability dimensions now".

The segmented blades fly on LUH, that is a different aircraft. The segmented blades and folding tail for Dhurv exist as Aero India mockup and computer graphics. Not one test flight has been undertaken to check if flight characteristics remain unchanged and structural integrity isnt compromised.

Two blade folding with front blade extending forward wont work even with larger hangers, because of the need to store other equipment like dipping sonar, torpedoes, depth charges, Sea Eagle missiles. With MH-60R, the storage requirements will increase with APKWS, Hellfire, NSM missiles.

BTW lack of knowledge on how things work onboard a ship is also showing on the IAF pilot. He understands the high altitude requirement well but not storage on board a ship.

Best way forward - let HAL take a couple of helicopters from the 16 order and fulfill it as per NUH specifications.

Given the complexity and time consuming procurement process, NUH isnt getting signed in the near future. GOI spending freeze due to COVID economic stress will further delay the NUH process.

If HAL solution is ready, then let them modify some of the 16 orders into NUH compliant machines in next 3-6 months.
Last edited by tsarkar on 13 Jun 2020 13:02, edited 1 time in total.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2977
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby tsarkar » 13 Jun 2020 12:59

Just realised K P Sanjeev Kumar posted the same in his blog. He has expressed much better than me.

He also covered the Maldivian Dhruv Mk3 flown by IN pilots for many years.

What is disgusting is that HAL was aware of that fact but falsely stated "IN doesnt know Mk3". This is plain dishonesty.

https://kaypius.com/2020/06/13/alh-vs-n ... ve-energy/

ALH vs NUH Debate – Clarifying & Moving Forward with Positive Energy

Recently, a war of words erupted between former naval aviators and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). An open forum Livefist Defence turned into a stage for angry exchange of words between veterans from Indian Navy and HAL. It is unfortunate and shifts focus from real enemies that threaten us today.

The bone of contention is the Naval Utility Helicopter (NUH). This paper aeroplane has occupied centrestage in many intersecting schools of thought. It is the first experiment in Strategic Partnership (SP) program rolled out by PM Narendra Modi government for creating private sector capacity in major aerospace and defence (A&D) manufacturing in addition to capabilities of Defence Public Sector Undertakings (PSU).

Many angry words were spoken; often leading the discourse towards “us versus them”; creating straw men anybody with a Twitter handle or WhatsApp account could attack.

Where does the pain come from

To make sense of the latest round of sparring between navy and HAL, one must understand where the pain comes from. Adm Arun Prakash, former Chief of the Naval Staff (CNS) and one of navy’s venerated aviators, has done more for indigenisation than many commentators on either side of this debate. He is a 1971-war hero who had more than two decades of service in whites when ALH first took to the skies. He was already occupying high office when the initial parleys on ALH took place. If he is miffed, one must understand why.

Adm Arun Prakash has worked through all key positions in naval aviation and given more than a fair share of rope to HAL during his stellar service career. He is an alumni of Air Force Test Pilots School (AFTPS); a Production Test Pilot (PTP) and former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. The HAL spokesperson who dismissed Adm AP’s remarks with “easy for retired persons to talk and give endless commentary” is an unfortunate example of corporate communication. It added more fat into the fire, drew sharp responses and diverted attention from real issues.

One of the most astute observations on where the HAL spokesperson’s pain possibly came from was summarised by author KS Nair (@TheBrownBeagle) on Twitter below!
Image
An observation by @TheBrownBeagle on Twitter

This was soon followed by headline jargon such as “Angry HAL replies“, “Navy throws it back“, etc. Many people feasted on the spectacle as the silent service watched on. This was followed up by another post on the same channel (Livefistdefence) from HAL’s senior test pilot in his “personal capacity”. The shadow-boxing marks a new low in customer-service relations from an industry otherwise known for the opposite, at least in public forum.

Delaminating the latest imbroglio

A humble admission. I have known and worked, if not flown, with each and every person in this round of ‘ALH versus NUH’ debate. I will attempt to clarify some issues rising from the latest opinion piece before we move on.

The senior test pilot who authored the piece is a brilliant TP and colleague whom I have known for over 20 years. We toiled through the flight test course (FTC) together and have shared cockpit in many sorties. He makes a fair point at the outset that “problems do occur but they are not because the men behind the machines did not do their jobs; there are limits to knowledge and one learns from experience“. I fully agree with this observation and politely request him to extend the same generosity to the customers too.

He further states: “none of the naval pilots have flown or assessed the current generation ALH. It’s sad that with 16 ALH in the pipeline, the Naval Project Team at HAL does not have a Test Pilot or a Test Engineer on its strength. The last Test Crew was posted to the project team some 6-8 years back and that too with no mandate to participate in the ongoing ALH flight trials“.

The last test pilot at NPO incidentally was me! I have some amazing experiences from those days!

HAL test crew and me undertook the maiden afloat trials of ALH Mk-3 DW151 in 2014 with a “clear mandate” for spot checks of Mk-3 systems and dynamic interface prior shipping it to Maldives. I have flown all marks of the ALH in my capacity as project test pilot appointed to Naval Project Office (NPO) at HAL. Naval pilots have been flying the ALH Mk-3 for over six years now; and continue to do so to this day. An ALH Mk-3 is still with Maldives, flown by naval pilots. What generation-change or quantum jump took place in six years, I am keen to know. The latest Mk-3 on offer to navy reportedly comes with additional sensors and customisation. I will be keen to report on this bird, given an opportunity.

If navy did miss something, it is the inability to field test crew to NPO at HAL since 2014. Instead, the navy has raised a centre of excellence for naval flight testing – the Naval Flight Test Squadron (NFTS) at Goa. HAL has regularly been in touch with NFTS. I am also informed that there is significant synergy between HAL and NFTS. Test crew from both sides are in regular touch.

The navy is a small service with limited means. Test crew are premium even in the IAF and anywhere else in the world. Given the present low-throughput of indigenous aerospace manufacturing, the nation or industry may hardly value or require test crew. But from my experience, test crew contribution is valued not by numbers but by effect.

To that end, whenever any crucial naval ALH trial is conducted, services of naval test crew are always enlisted. NPO (ALH) sits across the road inside the Rotary Wing Research and Design Centre (RWRDC). Moving that office into the flight operations complex of HAL is simply an organisational or real estate problem. It can be fixed if both sides give or take a little.

Keeping an eye on future naval projects, HAL could easily consider offering few retiring naval test crew a second career in their organisation. Every country with such capability does. There’s nothing many self-respecting test crew would love doing more than flight testing. The latest discourse creates an imaginary shortage where none exists. Test pilots who have aced hundreds of prototype sorties face uncertain careers in airline industry today. That’s a pot of gold industry and services can tap into for bridging voids in customer requirements and product development.

Another point the senior TP makes runs contrary to the very purpose of navy setting up the NPO back in late 80s:

“On the naval side, the role of the project team is reduced only to following up on the aircraft that come here for maintenance. There is no one to advise NHQ on what exactly HAL’s current capability is and how it has improved over the years. So, most of what you get is hearsay”.

While I understand where this complaint comes from, the role of NPO is not “following up on aircraft that come here (Bengaluru) for maintenance“. That is the role and charter of Naval Liaison Cell (NLC), Bengaluru – a completely separate entity. If today, NPO lacks a naval test pilot, so does HAL. If indeed the NPO has turned insignificant, navy needs to worry.

I took up duties at IHQ MoD (Navy) / DNAS at a point where the file for returning all eight naval ALH back to HAL was in process. I take some credit – along with many naviators who wished well for this bird – for having played a role in reversing this decision. An increasingly frustrated navy, left holding ALH that couldn’t sustain even a fair-weather embarkation, did a Williamson’s Turn to order 16 more ALH, albeit for a shore-based role.

I have not flown the ALH in operational roles. My first brush with ALH was at NPO which was also my last assignment before taking premature retirement from navy. I did not belong to any exclusive “members-only” club when I took office in NPO. My experience was thus not coloured by cognitive or selection bias. It came from a purely flight test background, having already flown about 18 types in India and abroad; with NHQ experience to boot. My paper on ‘Improving the Operational Utility of Naval ALH’ penned sometime in 2010-11 can be found in the dusty cupboards of NHQ or Western Naval Command.

Slowly, a momentum was generated. Maldives was the first beneficiary – not because ALH out-performed any competitition, but because it was an indigenous product that met a strategic purpose. That’s the signalling power of indigenisation. Today, HAL has orders for 16-each ALH Mk-3 from IN and Indian Coast Guard. See how far we have come!

Rest of the commentary by the senior TP highlights poor experience of IN with LSP aircraft and the inability to meet NSQRs. He writes emphatically “the Navy continues to hold only the Mk I (LSP) variants, hence the poor experience.”

While I do understand the difference between Limited Series Production (LSP) and Series Production (SP), fact remains that Indian Navy today has eight ALH – of which two are LSP and balance six are from SP. I am sure the 16 ALH Mk-3 will provide both sides an opportunity to fly and evaluate the improvements and updates. In fact, I see a golden opportunity for HAL to develop the 2-segmented blade and demonstrate a workable blade folding solution on one of the 16 Mk-3s.

This line from his post sums it up nicely and aligns with recent comments from other high-ranking officials of HAL: “ALH was specifically designed for high altitude and some intensive manoeuvring which are exactly opposite to what the Indian Navy needed.” If true, one wonders why HAL should persist with offering ALH back to the navy with no major change. Maybe I am missing something.

A question posed towards the end makes for interesting reading: “What is HAL asking? I suppose a level playing field. Allow ALH to compete and allow HAL the same margins that are given for development and integration of systems to foreign vendors. Don’t make a QR which keeps ALH out. Allow it to compete on its own merit rather than forcing it out by making a skewed qualitative requirement.” A Defence PSU asking for ‘level playing field’ is like Sachin Tendulkar asking for one while playing street cricket with the local boys!

“Foreign vendors only care about the gains that they will make, they do not want a self-reliant India. They want an India which they can continue to milk for years“, he writes. Fair point; but maybe the same holds true for DPSUs too. Strategic Partnership has approval of Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS). If the very premise of SP is being challenged, it is for the CCS to decide.

I completely endorse his closing remarks that “the Indian Navy and HAL can work together and resolve their differences. Both institutions owe this to the nation.” YES we can, and we SHOULD! It’s been 35 years since ALH NSQRs were released. During this period, Sub Lieutenants became Admirals and retired. In services, where “you have to move if you want to go places”, it is impossible, in my opinion, to foment or sustain any perceived “anti-indigenisation” agenda. The Indian Navy has always been “pro-indigenisation”. But they are admittedly a tough customer. There’s a goldmine waiting to be tapped here for OEMs. Go ahead and satisfy your best critic. The best brand ambassador for any product is a satisfied customer.

Your sharpest critic is not your enemy; just as a sycophant is not your best friend

Let’s do this together!

Somewhere down the line, this “us versus them” should be turned into “us and them together”. Rhetoric must make way for a deeper understanding of customer requirements. Together, everyone achieves more.

India is oozing with talent. But the entry barriers for people wanting to work with PSUs are huge. Having seen both sides of the fence, I feel, private sector can leapfrog processes that take years in state-owned entities if there is serious business to be transacted. All around me, I see bright sparks so well read; straining at the leash to work towards ‘atma nirbharta‘ (self-reliance). Some of them amaze me with their knowledge and energy. Some I had the good fortune to mentor left this country for foreign shores just because nobody around here gave them a chance to contribute.

Much talent and resources can be found within five miles from the hub of aviation design and development here in Bangalore if only we turn this debate away from “individuals” to “issues”, turn negative discourse to “positive engagement”, develop healthy professional attitude & eschew parochialism.

May the user have the final word on this debate. No world-class product can be developed in an atmosphere of mistrust. The last mile is often the hardest! Let us put the past behind and move forward with positive energy. I leave you with one of the best lines i heard from a commentator on Twitter in this discussion:

Image

One of the best commentaries on the subject from Indranil Roy on Twitter


I hope members notice the comment from our Indranil there.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 850
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby sankum » 13 Jun 2020 13:11

The initial requirement for NUH was 56 nos with option for 28 that is total 84 nos if all the options are exercised.
In SP model the requirement went up to 111nos i.e, 27 extra. The total deal $3b.
It is likely just as additional ka 31 order was reduced from 10 to 6 after fresh assessment to save money.
The same will happen for NUH were immediate requirement is likely to be 60.
Let HAL develop a Navy specific Naval ALH.

LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 234
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby LakshmanPST » 13 Jun 2020 15:33

One point I do not understand...
If preparing SQRs to favour one particular Vendor is a crime, then isn't it a crime to prepare SQRs to intentionally keep one Vendor out (which indirectly means favouring remaining Vendors)...???
Doesn't it invite an investigation...???

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4708
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chola » 13 Jun 2020 15:36

@ tsarkar ji, great posts.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rahul M » 13 Jun 2020 18:04

tsarkar wrote:...


Sir, I just had to delete a bunch of personal attacks from your post directed at Karan M.

For anyone else I would have readily issued board warnings and a one month ban. It is only out of deference to your military service that I making this request instead.

Please, whatever be the disagreement, do not indulge in name-calling. This cannot go on.
Rahul.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 285
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby basant » 13 Jun 2020 19:47

HAL Chairman's interview by Livefist

KSingh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby KSingh » 16 Jun 2020 19:02

First post


On the subject of HAL and their work culture


Why even go down this rabbit hole of what the work culture is as HAL? Keep the discussion technical based- on the product. Create requirements and it’s up to the OEM to deliver. Similarly when all major items come with watt wires and PBLs today it’s not relevant what our OPINION on HAL’s work culture or after sales service is. The PBL assures of a minimum % fleet (usually 75% in Peacetime) availability at any one time. Black and white- HAL has to do whatever to keep that adhered to. And the navy themselves will get a taste of this with their soon to be delivered 16 MK.3s.

Too many emotions get involved when some talk a lot indian projects, there’s too much baggage that some bring into these disccsuons that imported systems are entirely free of. Focus on the product. It’s 2020, and we are talinginf about MK.3 not MK.1 LSP models that these Naval TPs got their hands on 15++ years back.


On the table is a platform that has all the requisite performance characteristcs That the nave would want with all the previous issues such as stoawbilkty and or serviceability Galen care of. The ONE issue that is really bothering me is the WEIGHT issue as it seems like it’s the last remaining hurdle that the navy may throw at HAL to prevent the ALH from qualifying.

-So we know that the navy diluted their AUW requirements from 4.5t to 5t, they haven’t publicly said why but I’ve heard the speculation that it was to give the S-76 a chance (HAL TP seemed to echo the view)

- ALH AUW is 5.75T (from HAL TP) so we are arguing over over 750KG which isn’t an inconsiderable amount of weight
- HOWEVER- and this is what has been bugging me, since when did AUW become a limiting factor? Dimensions (stowabikkty) sure, there’s finite room on a ship, we all understand that. But weight? Are they trying to say the landing pad on the ships cannot take more than 5t? That surely isn’t right (and I’ll explain why below). And again we are talking about AUW not empty weight. There’s nothing forcing the navy operating the ALHs at Max AUW. The empty weights of the Panther and Dhruv are very similar and their engines have very comparable SFC (Shakti is actually on the more efficient side to the Arriel 2X). The ALH has superior internal cabin volume sure (2 more seats AFAIK) and most of the higher AUW of the ALH compared to the Panther will be higher payload/fuel capacity.
- So what are these smaller IN ships that absolutely cannot operate a NUH heavier than 5t hence this NSQR on the RFI? The smallest ships with aviation decks in the Navy are the P28 ASW corvettes and Surya OPVs. Well the P28s are designed to operate the >10to NMRH ASWs and the Surya is explicitly designed to be able to operate the ALH and have done so in the past:

Image

https://ibb.co/hH5R2s4

So once again, what are we exactly talking about? Most of the navy’s ships house the Sea king or are designed to, many can even house 2 of them. So it absolutely is contingent on the Navy to now justify this NSQR, if they are going to use 750KG AUW as a reason to exclude the ALH from the single largest order in HAL’s rotary wing history they had better have a good explanation. And remember the 16 ICG MK.3s on order are intended to operate from their larger ships which are still only comparable with the very smallest IN vessels. If someone can provide even a single ship currently or soon to be in IN service that couldn’t operate the ALH due to weight considerations I would be very grateful. This is just another red herring as far as I’m concerned.



And sure, with the resolved or soon to be resolved issues detractors may say “this is up to HAL promises” but what’s going to come quicker, HAL porting over designs they have already designed and validated on the LUH (segmented folding blades) or going through this entire circus of RFI—>RFP—>Trails—> technical evualtuons—> L1 selection—> cost negations—> DAC approval—> CCS approval—> inevitable delays—> contract signature—> delivery.



We are looking at at least another 10+ years before that process delivers even the first unit.
And let’s not forget this is a process the navy has been trying to get off the ground since 2011 when they get the original
Consent from HAL to go for a foreign NUH through the “buy” mechanism. And lets also not forget this is the very first of the entirely unproven SPM deals that they are trying to push so there’s an entire untested layer of nonsense that will be added to the entire process. Can this deal survive 2 general elections especially (god forbid) an opposition party comes in and starts to run amok, the first thing they’ll target is the SPM (even though it hasn’t delivered squat).

Worst case scenario it takes HAL 2 years to validate the new blade folding mechanism, it will be 3 years after that they can deliver the first ALHs so 5 years from now. If anyone actually thinks they can get a NUH quicker through the SPM process I have a bridge to sell you.

In short, forget and forgive HAL for any last sins. Assess the N-ALH MK.3 on its own merits and you’ll see it’s by far the best platform on offer and it just so happens to be indian.


Or pursue a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that won’t deliver anything this side of 2030 and have the Chetaks still serving 15+ years from now.


Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Philip » 16 Jun 2020 22:22

Look what's happening in Ladakh.How long due you expect the IN to wait,and wait,and wait for HAL to deliver.If rhe shit hits the fan and it expands into the maritime sphere,the absence of ASW and other helos may cost us dearly. The ONLY way in which to get HAL to deliver is the BT route.Pilatus chosen ,a large first batch bought before HAL got its act together with the HTT-40. The GOI should immediately order the most suitable and affordable firang helo,at least 40 to 60,and see if HAL can deliver at all. The req. is for over 100 at least,let HAL compete for tranche 2. Secondly,HAL's dismal rate of production inspires littlf confidtnce that it will meet timelines. .Look at the LCA line for instance. Any wonder why the armed forces still want many firang weapon systems.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8174
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Indranil » 17 Jun 2020 01:46

Are we waiting for technology development or fund release?

The Ka-226T is stuck. The C295W is stuck. Just saying.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby srai » 17 Jun 2020 04:19

For “high end” IMRH ASW work, IN got the 24 Romeos. Get another 12-24. That should cover that category requirement for a long while. Use the time obtained to work on HAL-IMRH for future replacement/augmentation.

For “lower-end” NUH requirements, get the NALH MK.3 with segmented folding blades. Work with GoI, DRDO, HAL and private sector for additional customizations and PBL support.

No brainer :twisted:

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby srai » 17 Jun 2020 07:32

Indranil wrote:Are we waiting for technology development or fund release?
...

Sounds like both when it comes to HAL NUH. Who funds R&D segmented blades (and other customization) before orders guaranteed? Last couple of years, HAL has been strapped for cash. GoI/Navy also not funding.

How ready is this? How much funding and time is required to make it ready for the IN?
Image
Image

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 850
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby sankum » 17 Jun 2020 11:41

In NMRH Airbus H225M will win. It was first in CG tender for 14 helicopter.
When the ALH was being developed 120 nos requirement of IN of which 60 nos were to be utility and 60 ASW versions.
Make IN joint developer for NIMRH. Only then they will go for Indian Helicopter otherwise we will only buy French Helicopter under SP model. If immediate need then they can buy more 24 nos to 40 nos more MH60R/S.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1372
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ks_sachin » 17 Jun 2020 21:12

srai wrote:
Indranil wrote:Are we waiting for technology development or fund release?...

Sounds like both when it comes to HAL NUH. Who funds R&D segmented blades (and other customization) before orders guaranteed? Last couple of years, HAL has been strapped for cash. GoI/Navy also not funding.

How ready is this? How much funding and time is required to make it ready for the IN?

Still a mock up.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5288
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Kartik » 18 Jun 2020 03:32

Sikorsky wins $375 million customization contract for Indian Navy


Lockheed Martin has won a $375 million contract for bespoke hardware and software for India’s acquisition of 24 Sikorsky MH-60R anti-submarine warfare helicopters.

“This modification provides non-recurring efforts to design and develop unique hardware and software for the Multi-Role Helicopter MH-60R development programme for the government of India,” says a US Department of Defense contract announcement.


In May, Lockheed’s Sikorsky rotorcraft unit signed a $905 million contract with the US Navy to provide 24 MH-60Rs to the Indian navy via the US government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) process.

The $905 million contract was far less than the original notice, which valued the deal at $2.6 billion.

At the time of the May award, Tom Kane, director of Sikorsky naval helicopter programmes, said the $905 million would cover production of the helicopters, but that additional work would be necessary for “unique modifications and systems”.


The MH-60R is New Delhi’s second acquisition of a major US Navy anti-submarine warfare platform, following its acquisition of the Boeing P-8I Neptune in a 2009 deal.

In Indian navy service the P-8I is understood to feature several Indian-produced systems, such as Bharat Electronics identification friend or foe equipment, and a locally developed datalink.


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9322
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jun 2020 17:44

Lockheed wins customisation contract for Indian Navy MH-60Rs
https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopter ... 49.article

basant
BRFite
Posts: 285
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby basant » 01 Jul 2020 19:16

‘Why Has Indian Navy Been Mute Spectator To HAL’s Allegation?’
...
Despite such enormous advantages of the SP Model, why is it not being progressed? Bureaucrats in the procurement process are the advisers of the Government. It is they who need to evaluate the gains of the SP Model against the nomination of HAL for the NUH programme. Number crunching with facts and figures will speak for itself and quell the misinformation and accusatory tone of heads of DPSUs like CMD HAL. Another issue that needs to be addressed is the compromise of the trust in the procurement process caused by the statement of CMD HAL. Despite a diverse and qualified high level Empowered Project Committee steering the case, allegations on it do not augur well for the Acquisition Process.
...


sankum
BRFite
Posts: 850
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby sankum » 01 Jul 2020 19:32

Such series of paid news/propaganda are by, who are fearful of losing lucrative $3b because it is on verge of getting busted by naval ALH.
Best ignored. All are repeating same Lahori logic.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2923
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby abhik » 01 Jul 2020 20:31

+400, Our aim should be solutions, preferably local, that meet our need with in reasonable timeframe and cost. We don't have the luxury for empire building with SP model etc., if we want to increase private participation there are plenty of other opportunities (some of which are going to direct imports today).

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8174
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Indranil » 01 Jul 2020 21:56

sankum wrote:Such series of paid news/propaganda are by, who are fearful of losing lucrative $3b because it is on verge of getting busted by naval ALH.
Best ignored. All are repeating same Lahori logic.

Sanku sir, no sir!!!!! This is DKS we are speaking of!!! IN's annoyance is well-founded. We are all on the same side. Amrit will come out of this manthan!

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9322
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 02 Jul 2020 21:16

Boeing's F-18 Block III Super Hornet on offer for the Indian Navy's 57 carrier borne fighter contest.

Image

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 508
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby MeshaVishwas » 02 Jul 2020 21:47


This entire "Sponsored by Shiv Aroor" tu tu me me saga is a real downer.

He is playing the nasty Banker in Monopoly.

Maybe next time vets give dead fist defence a pass.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 285
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby basant » 02 Jul 2020 22:04

^^^
All said, he's doing what a fair journalist should do. Present both sides PoVs.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22833
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chetak » 03 Jul 2020 00:32

Rakesh wrote:Chetak Sir, this has already been posted and discussed in detail. Please review the earlier pages and other Indian Navy threads.

Please delete the above post.


Saar

I know the various personalities mentioned as well as the psu in question.

There is not one word out of place, in fact, many of the gorier details have been very diplomatically left out.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9322
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 03 Jul 2020 00:36

No Saar for me :)

Do add your own views to the discussion. Thank you Chetak Sir.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22833
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chetak » 03 Jul 2020 01:03

Rakesh wrote:No Saar for me :)

Do add your own views to the discussion. Thank you Chetak Sir.


Saar,

Tried to do so a few times but was told not to, so best let sleeping dogs lie.

I have seen this project closely from its MBB days.

I have lost track of what is classified and what's not.

know some aviation enthusiasts who went to school with kurt tank's kid and also sometimes a few jobless designers and TPs get together to shoot the breeze. That's when unfiltered history is minutely deconstructed and who did or didn't do what truly sees the harsh light of hindsight.

as the discussions progress, so does the rising temper of the not so patiently waiting wives.

when the PSU hierarchy is almost pyramidic in structure, not as pyramidically pointed like the military, skulduggery is the way most often preferred by those eager to progress beyond their station in life.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8174
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Indranil » 03 Jul 2020 03:32

OT

Chetakji, are you a closet poet? Your last comment sounds quite prophetic. Or is it just my imagination because I read your comments just after reading some poems of Dushyant Kumar ji.

May be, it's time for a virtual BRF get-together.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22833
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby chetak » 03 Jul 2020 04:10

Indranil wrote:OT

Chetakji, are you a closet poet? Your last comment sounds quite prophetic. Or is it just my imagination because I read your comments just after reading some poems of Dushyant Kumar ji.

May be, it's time for a virtual BRF get-together.


Don't do hindi kavita saar.

urdu sometimes when I can understand it which is very rare and even then I need the urdu written in hindi or english scripts.

But I am most impressed by those who have a naturally felicitous way with words though I don't count myself so fortunate.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1865
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby wig » 14 Jul 2020 10:24

Navy to get new carrier-based jet by 2032, to replace MiG-29K
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... epage=true

The Navy is expected to get the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL)-built twin-engine carrier aircraft by 2032. It will replace the MiG-29Ks in service which are scheduled to start going out by 2034,” the source said. The Navy currently operates Russian-origin carrier INS Vikramaditya and expects to have the first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC-I) Vikrant operational by 2022. With a second carrier to come in, the Navy is already evaluating a global tender for 57 carrier-based twin-engine fighter aircraft.

LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 234
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby LakshmanPST » 15 Jul 2020 03:14

wig wrote:Navy to get new carrier-based jet by 2032, to replace MiG-29K
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... epage=true

With the new jet under development and also factoring in budgetary constraints, the Navy is looking to revise the tender for 57 carrier-based jets downwards. The revised numbers have not been finalised yet, the source stated.

So, the numbers of required Naval fighters will be down... My guess is, they will bring down the required number to somewhere around 36-40... The only likely candidate, if at all the deal materialize (which I believe is a big 'if'), is SHornet...
Navy will probably operate mix of F18 and TEDBF in future...

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9322
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 15 Jul 2020 04:23

It will be around two squadrons like you said. I am glad reality finally hit home. I hope the article is true.

57 carrier borne fighters were going to cost around $13 - $14 billion USD. At that cost, it would be more expensive than the aircraft carrier she is supposed to serve from i.e. IAC-2! :lol:

shravanp
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2407
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby shravanp » 15 Jul 2020 04:34

Rakesh wrote:Boeing's F-18 Block III Super Hornet on offer for the Indian Navy's 57 carrier borne fighter contest.

Very nice to put India's map in entirety including full J&K in their sales pitch

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4442
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Jul 2020 05:58

Rakesh wrote:It will be around two squadrons like you said. I am glad reality finally hit home. I hope the article is true.

57 carrier borne fighters were going to cost around $13 - $14 billion USD. At that cost, it would be more expensive than the aircraft carrier she is supposed to serve from i.e. IAC-2! :lol:

Hmm...m not getting this. Isn't the tedbf supposed to be available by 2030s? Where does the shornet fit in? Totally confused wonlee

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 15 Jul 2020 06:13

It's a sales brochure to impress desis to buy it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ramana » 15 Jul 2020 06:22

KaranM, I want HAL mgt board moved out of Bengluru.
The headquarters can be anywhere like Boeing is in Chicago.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9322
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Rakesh » 15 Jul 2020 07:39

Cain Marko wrote:
Rakesh wrote:It will be around two squadrons like you said. I am glad reality finally hit home. I hope the article is true.

57 carrier borne fighters were going to cost around $13 - $14 billion USD. At that cost, it would be more expensive than the aircraft carrier she is supposed to serve from i.e. IAC-2! :lol:

Hmm...m not getting this. Isn't the tedbf supposed to be available by 2030s? Where does the shornet fit in? Totally confused wonlee

The 57 carrier borne contest was started prior to TEDBF. The Navy wants to continue with the program, despite the TEDBF program. As per the article, the MiG-29K will start retirement by 2032. To replace the MiG-29Ks and to mitigate the risk against any likely TEDBF delay, a contest for phoren carrier borne fighters is being held.

There is no guarantee that TEDBF will come on time (early 2030s). You have been on BRF for a while. Which Indian military program do you know that has arrived on time and on cost? Same is largely true for international military programs as well. It just the nature of the business and with the lobbies in India against local maal/industry, don't expect any local product to come on time. But never call out the lobby i.e. you will be tarred and feathered! Sometimes, it is the services themselves that jeopardize the product in favour of a phoren one. There is an old joke that makes the rounds at North Block (MoD) ---> the services wait for a phoren product to come out and then write the RFI based on the specs of the phoren product.

The initial plan was for three squadrons of "phoren" carrier borne fighters + reserves. Those three squadrons were to serve on each of the three aircraft carriers ---> the current Vikramaditya, the new and upcoming Vikrant and the planned Vishal.

The only two serious contenders in this 57 aircraft contest are Dassault (Rafale M) and Boeing (F-18SH). The other two - Saab and Mikoyan - are just there for appearance purposes. Just to give validity that it is an open contest. But only Boeing and Dassault are the real players. They are the only two that have any real experience designing and operating carrier borne naval fighters. Now depending on who you ask, either Boeing or Dassault is leading the contest. In my humble opinion, I believe it is Boeing. But it is too early in the stage to conclusively state either way.

The Navy never had any serious support from the MoD over the IAC-2 (Vishal) proposal. At every step of the way, the MoD has shot down the idea. Initially the Navy wanted a 65,000 ton, nuclear powered and EMALS equipped vessel. That proposal was shot down by the MoD for lack of funds. Then the Navy revised the design to 50,000 ton, non-nuclear powered vessel but with EMALS. That idea too was shot down. Now the latest is a ski jump vessel, not sure of the tonnage though. With the global economy tanking, that too has taken a back burner.

To be very honest, IAC-2 was always a white elephant project that would have never passed muster at the MoD. The Malabar exercises with the US Navy gave the Indian Navy an insight into intensive carrier borne operations. Our Admirals wanted to mimic that and with the ongoing Indo-US bonhomie, that dream appeared to become a reality. Alas, it died at that the funding stage. Classic case of senior military leadership making grandoise plans without little to any consultation from the other stakeholders (MoD, MoF and the GOI at large). A few on BRF were salivating at the idea of Super Hornets in Indian Naval colours (operating from the bells-and-whistles Vishal), which would have influenced events from Alaska all the way to the South China Sea! :lol:

Now this is the latest. A downward revision of the 57 carrier borne fighter contest. I still remember Admiral Sunil Lanba (retd) stating during Navy Day 2018 that there is no budgetary restrictions to this phoren naval fighter acquisition. And then this happens. To be fair though, no one expected COVID-19 to ruin the global economy the way it has. At this stage, I don't think the Navy will be able to afford even the downward revision. Not to mention there are other more urgent acquisitions in the pipeline for the services - 114 MRFA (another white elephant program), six Project 75I vessels, etc.

And between the two air arms (air force vs navy), who is complaining of squadron shortage? The IAF will always get first priority. The Naval Air Arm will get crumbs onlee. The navy has a way out of this mess. I doubt they want it though. Still holding on to the mythical white unicorn called the Vishal and her complement of phoren carrier borne fighters. Lay the keel for another Vikrant Class vessel with larger lifts and complete development of TEDBF. Soldier on with MiG-29K till then. Anything else will only cause even more delays.

The lesson to learn (which will still not be adopted) is self reliance. Till today, it is only a political slogan to announce at public rallies. Talk about Atmanirbhar Bharat in public, but MoD will only approve files for 21 MiG-29s and 12 Su-30MKIs. But file for 83 Tejas Mk1As will now happen only by Dec 2020. Always some excuse with sanctioning funding for local maal. Heaven only knows what new evil scheme the lobbies will come up with to delay the signing even further. Files for phoren maal move at the speed of Mach 2 during times of emergency. Files for local maal still continue at the same pace, regardless of whether there is an emergency or not.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 335
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby ManuJ » 15 Jul 2020 10:33

Rakesh wrote:Talk about Atmanirbhar Bharat in public, but MoD will only approve files for 21 MiG-29s and 12 Su-30MKIs. But file for 83 Tejas Mk1As will now happen only by Dec 2020. Always some excuse with sanctioning funding for local maal. Heaven only knows what new evil scheme the lobbies will come up with to delay the signing even further. Phoren Maal files move at Mach 2 during times of emergency. Files for local maal still continue at the same pace, regardless of whether there is an emergency or not.

Not that I don't agree, but the situation is mitigated to some extent because in the case of desi procurement, especially procurement from a PSU, there is an unwritten agreement that long precedes the actual written agreement. So everyone in the government knows that the contract for 83 Tejas Mk1A will be inked and its only a matter of time, but still, the file has to take its due course. Meanwhile HAL has already started the preparations for production. Another example is the LCH where HAL has been churning out the copters off the production line before the official contract has been finalized.

m_saini
BRFite
Posts: 200
Joined: 23 May 2020 20:25

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby m_saini » 15 Jul 2020 10:53

^^ Why would the files move for desi stuff anyway? There's no ideology behind it. There is one for americans (private sector making money), for China (heaven's mandate), and for Russia (communism). Indigenous products would get orders if Kalyani or L&T etc bribe some media group and have them print articles on how this party or that is holding back indigenous products and need to be defeated in the next elections. Why even have press freedom when you can't use them for your benefit?

Besides I don't know why we even have the carriers, that we do, anyway. They were never required for the pakis so why? The chinis got their Liaoning combat ready in 2016 and that's with them having unkil standing right on their necks. It's just sad seeing Admirals begging the gormints for a fancy new EMALS toy like a child begging the parent to take a loan out and buy him a car. We've been behaving like a degenerate who has just won a lottery and won't stop until he has bought all the coke in the world, except we haven't even won the lottery yet. Same goes for our Air force and Army, the lust for imports is unreal.

LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 234
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby LakshmanPST » 15 Jul 2020 12:01

Cain Marko wrote:Hmm...m not getting this. Isn't the tedbf supposed to be available by 2030s? Where does the shornet fit in? Totally confused wonlee


I think both Vikramaditya and Vikrant need around 30 jets each...
We have only 2 squadrons of MIG29K enough for Vikramaditya...
IAC1 will be ready by 2022, but no jets currently... So, these Shornets are for IAC1...

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5288
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Aviation

Postby Kartik » 15 Jul 2020 21:56

Some absolutely spectacular shots from the IN Spokesperson on Twitter, commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the INAS 300 'White Tigers', the Navy's elite squadron, and sister squadron to the IAF's No.1 'Tigers' squadron.

Twitter link

Image
Image
Image
Image


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Neela, pradeyal, siddhu and 61 guests