Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

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.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 20:07

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 306934.cms
“The contract was concluded with M/s Boeing, USA in January 2009 at MUSD 2,137.54. At a later date, M/s Boeing, USA offered the product support under a separate negotiable contract and consequently the deduced ranking of M/s Boeing, USA as L-1 turned out to be incorrect,” the report says.

Coming down heavily on the deal, which was inked to meet urgent requirements of the navy for a long range recon platform, the CAG has also said that the Boeing has not met its offset obligations of $ 641 million till date, despite the contract specifying that all obligations have to be fulfilled by August 2016.

More worryingly, the CAG has alleged that the American platform does not fully meet the requirements of the Indian Navy. “Owing to capability limitations of radars installed onboard, the aircraft is not able to achieve the envisaged coverage area requirements,” it says.

Specifying details, the report says that while torpedoes were procured as part of the deal, a critical ammunition for anti submarine warfare has not been procured even now. “In the absence of ‘X’ Bombs, the ASW capability of the aircraft could only be partially fulfilled,” it says. It also has observations on the limitations of sonabuoys ordered by the Navy.



Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 20:08

Corporate Feud Delays Crucial Indian Navy Warship Project

https://defenceaviationpost.com/corpora ... p-project/
One of India’s most crucial naval asset projects meant for the domestic industry is stuck in a corporate feud. Despite being flagged as an urgent requirement for influencing maritime operations in the Indian Ocean, India’s Ministry of Defense has not been able to finalize the $3 billion contract for four landing ships.

“No contract for construction of four Landing Platform Docks (LPD) has been awarded by Ministry of Defence,” Nirmala Sitharaman, India’s defense minister, responded to a question put up by a parliamentarian on Monday.

The question was whether the construction of four landing platform docks for the Indian Navy had been held up due to some dispute. Read More

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 20:11

IF P-8I was not the winner of L1 then this would be another Scam only done by UPA and the present Government will highlight it

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5697
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 07 Aug 2018 21:34

Rakesh wrote:Why Is The Indian Navy Racing A MiG-29 & A Lamborghini?
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/08 ... ghini.html


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5697
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Rakesh » 07 Aug 2018 21:45

Austin wrote:IF P-8I was not the winner of L1 then this would be another Scam only done by UPA and the present Government will highlight it

Not to worry Austin Saar, Ajai Shukla has come to Boeing's rescue :lol:

CAG criticises UPA’s purchase of Boeing P-8I aircraft
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2018/08/ ... oeing.html

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5264
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Viv S » 07 Aug 2018 21:46

.....
Last edited by Rakesh on 07 Aug 2018 21:48, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: I hope you do not mind, but I will have to remove this post. I already posted it right above you :)

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5264
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Viv S » 07 Aug 2018 21:52

Austin wrote:Hahaha , You need to do many hundred hours of conversion training to get type certified , Those training on Goshawks were basic one.

That's what you need to get trap qualified. Type certification is a different thing. When the MiG-29Ks was evaluated, there were no trap qualified pilots available. And until the SBTF was operational, INAS 303 trained as a land-based unit.

Most of IN 29K pilot were trained in Russia and then once SBTF happened they were trained here.

SBTF happened in 2013-14. The follow-on order for MiG-29Ks was placed in 2010. And as the CAG report reveals - the MiG-29K's issues were revealed when the deck trials began in 2012.
Last edited by Viv S on 07 Aug 2018 21:56, edited 1 time in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5264
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Viv S » 07 Aug 2018 21:55

Rakesh wrote:I hope you do not mind, but I will have to remove this post. I already posted it right above you :)

No issues. But do add the excerpts to your post, if you don't mind. Would help most readers get a quick overview of those points.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 22:07

Rajesh Ajai can’t white wash quoting unnamed mod and Boeing sources :((

In plain English if fair selection of tender was done Boeing would have lost the deal to Airbus as they lost the L-1 tender , this is gross impropeitary by UPA government amounting to scam by manipulating figures.

On technical side Radars and Sonobuoys are subpar don’t perform as advertised.

On financial side Offset are not yet discharged

These are claims of CAG , can any one post full CAG report ?

The devil is in the details which full report can revel
Last edited by Austin on 07 Aug 2018 22:11, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 22:10

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:Hahaha , You need to do many hundred hours of conversion training to get type certified , Those training on Goshawks were basic one.

That's what you need to get trap qualified. Type certification is a different thing. When the MiG-29Ks was evaluated, there were no trap qualified pilots available. And until the SBTF was operational, INAS 303 trained as a land-based unit.

Most of IN 29K pilot were trained in Russia and then once SBTF happened they were trained here.

SBTF happened in 2013-14. The follow-on order for MiG-29Ks was placed in 2010. And as the CAG report reveals - the MiG-29K's issues were revealed when the deck trials began in 2012.


I am speaking of type qualification , all pilots go through type qualification of 100 of hours before they are type qualified. That includes many dozen Landing using arrester recovery method.

Both land and then carrier is used for type qualification that each pilot has to go through the Mig-29 has extensively gone through this and so did the pilot

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5264
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Viv S » 07 Aug 2018 22:28

Austin wrote:I am speaking of type qualification , all pilots go through type qualification of 100 of hours before they are type qualified. That includes many dozen Landing using arrester recovery method.

Both land and then carrier is used for type qualification that each pilot has to go through the Mig-29 has extensively gone through this and so did the pilot

Not when there is no aircraft carrier or SBTF to retain currency on. For a shore-based aircraft (which it was for 5 years) it is quite possible to be type qualified without carrier rating. Only a few RAAF Super Hornet pilots are carrier qualified and only those on exchange are current.

Indian pilots began training for carrier operations only in 2012-2013.

India receives modernisation kits for MiG-29 fighters - April 2014
According to Korotkov, the training of Indian pilots for the MiG-29K/KUB deck-based fighters continues. The second batch of five Indian pilots started their training at the Goa naval aviation test range. “After getting the capacity certificate they will have the right to fly planes, taking off and landing on the Vikramaditya aircraft carrier,” Korotkov said.

Korotokov added that the training of the previous group of five pilots was carried out in two stages. The first was held on a Russian training set and the second - at a recently built in India training range. The first landing of the MiG-29KUB fighter, steered by an Indian pilot, on the Vikramaditya aircraft carrier’s deck took place on February 7, 2014.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 22:46

That’s what I said the Russian training took earlier when Indian took the 29K , without the training by by Indian pilots and earlier by Russians they would not have been type qualified.

Unless the IN pilot did nothing and sat ideal for 2 years between 2008 and 2010

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 07 Aug 2018 22:48

Airbus could sue the MOD in court if CAG report on L1 tendering fudging turns out to be true , even Rafale won on L1 bidding

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6210
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby nachiket » 07 Aug 2018 22:57

I cannot understand this overwhelming desire to give the Russians a pass on the shoddy job they seem to have performed navalising the Mig-29k. Both Adm Arun Prakas's comments as well as the CAG report provide enough evidence to conclude that these are not the usual teething issues that any newly acquired fighter faces. Indian taxpayers have paid in full for this and the Russians have gypped us on the deal. Not for the first time either.

How are we any better than journalists who seem to jump in to defend any US manufacturer like clockwork just as they have done now? At least they probably get paid to do it. We seem to do it out of a conviction that the Russians can do no wrong, no matter the facts staring us in the face.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2210
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby abhik » 07 Aug 2018 23:21

Rakesh wrote:
Austin wrote:IF P-8I was not the winner of L1 then this would be another Scam only done by UPA and the present Government will highlight it

Not to worry Austin Saar, Ajai Shukla has come to Boeing's rescue :lol:

CAG criticises UPA’s purchase of Boeing P-8I aircraft
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2018/08/ ... oeing.html

What was the P8 up against?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2018 23:25

refurbished IL38 from boneyards...

CASA C295 is at best a MRMP.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Aug 2018 23:26

Austin wrote:The 29K extensively operated from its land based facilities during 2008 to 2010 period SBTF at Russia/Ukr and latest at INS hansa and most of the pilots got their training from SBTF , So yes the IN knew quite well in 2 years of Ops on Mig-29K before operating their 2nd batch. Not just that the INS Vikrant was also designed around Mig-29K

Not only that it was also tested on the Kuznetsov before bring officially handed over to the Indian Navy.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Aug 2018 23:28

Viv S wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Again, the Indian Navy was fully part of the trials and testing program right from the mid 2000s, why would they accept the fighter if they thought it was inadequately tested it made? In fact they were happy enough that they ordered a new batch as soon as they could, even before the vik trials could commence.

It was NOT tested. That's the point. Not in operational conditions anyway, that is to say in carrier operations. Not least because we had no pilots certified in STOBAR ops."

It was tested on the Kuznetsov, there's was a video of this in the net.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Aug 2018 23:29

abhik wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Not to worry Austin Saar, Ajai Shukla has come to Boeing's rescue :lol:

CAG criticises UPA’s purchase of Boeing P-8I aircraft
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2018/08/ ... oeing.html

What was the P8 up against?

Airbus 319 from bae I think

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Aug 2018 23:43

nachiket wrote:I cannot understand this overwhelming desire to give the Russians a pass on the shoddy job they seem to have performed navalising the Mig-29k. Both Adm Arun Prakas's comments as well as the CAG report provide enough evidence to conclude that these are not the usual teething issues that any newly acquired fighter faces. Indian taxpayers have paid in full for this and the Russians have gypped us on the deal. Not for the first time either.

How are we any better than journalists who seem to jump in to defend any US manufacturer like clockwork just as they have done now? At least they probably get paid to do it. We seem to do it out of a conviction that the Russians can do no wrong, no matter the facts staring us in the face.


Not saying that the bird doesnt have issues, it obviously has. But what I'm saying, based on both chief and ex chiefs statements is that the issues seem fixable and nothing to the extent that is being made up such as buying new fighters as Replacements for the mig 29. There is absolutely no evidence for such exaggeration based on official statement from the CNS.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5264
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Viv S » 08 Aug 2018 01:20

Cain Marko wrote:It was tested on the Kuznetsov, there's was a video of this in the net.

By RAC-MiG pilots. There were only observers from the Indian side. The ability to launch and recover from a carrier was demonstrated, but the effect of arrested recovery on the airframe was only realised after the order for the follow-on batch had been placed.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 10:26

Viv S wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:It was tested on the Kuznetsov, there's was a video of this in the net.

By RAC-MiG pilots. There were only observers from the Indian side. The ability to launch and recover from a carrier was demonstrated, but the effect of arrested recovery on the airframe was only realised after the order for the follow-on batch had been placed.


All the points were also noted and observed by IN and verified by IN personal on both for the aircraft and ship , Unless the IN certifies the ships /aircraft that it met all test criteria they dont sign the final document , THis is true for all purchase

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 10:33

Defence ministry jacked up prices of Spanish plane to make US aircraft look cheaper: CAG

India Today Sandeep Unnithan

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) today said that the defence ministry inflated a bid from a Spanish company to make a rival US-made anti-submarine aircraft look cheaper.

Raising serious questions over the $2.1 billion purchase of eight P-8I Poseidon Long Range Maritime Patrol from the US in 2009 in its report tabled before Parliament today, the CAG said a $641.26 million offset agreement concluded in 2009 had not yet been fufilled.

The P8-I, a militarised version of the Boeing 737 commercial jet, is the mainstay of the Indian Navys long-range maritime patrol fleet. It can carry sonabuoys to detect, track and destroy submarines and air-to-surface missiles to target warships. Twelve P8-Is are in service and four more are on order with the navy eventually hoping to field a fleet of 24 such aircraft over the next decade.

The CAG said that the MoD enhanced the financial bid of EADS CASA of Spain to cater for 20 years product support cost while ignoring this element in respect of M/s Boeing, USA.

At a later date, M/s Boeing, USA offered the product support under a separate negotiable contract and consequently the deduced ranking of M/s Boeing, USA as L-1 turned out to be incorrect.


The deal for the aircraft was signed in January 2009 and all eight aircrafts were delivered by 2015. The Congress has attacked the BJP in the ongoing monsoon session of parliament over the 7.8 billion Euro 2016 Rafale deal alleging it paid a higher price than the one negotiated by it between 2012 and 2014. The CAG report is likely to provide fresh ammunition for the BJP to attack the Congress with, except that it gets a little complicated.

ALSO READ | Swaraj calls Italian PM; discusses steps to revitalise bilateral ties

The NDA too signed a deal for four additional P-8 Is in July 2016 under the option clause in the original contract. The deal worth around $1 billion was made under the price negotiated for the first batch of eight aircraft. The additional P-8Is are to be delivered beginning 2020.

The CAG says that the MoD concluded a $641.26 million (Rs 3,127.43 crore) offset contract with Boeing, USA. Under the MoDs offset policy on capital procurements, an OEM has to buy defence-related products worth 30 per cent of the value of the contract, from the customers market. In this case, the offset obligations which were to be fulfilled by August 2016 or seven years from the date of contract signing, had not been done.


M/s Boeing, USA had claimed Offset credits on mere placement of purchase orders defeating the very purpose of Offset obligations the CAG report said.The report went on to add that critical role equipment offered by Boeing did not meet the Indian Navys needs.

Owing to capability limitations of radars installed onboard, the aircraft is not able to achieve the envisaged coverage area requirements, the report said. Contracts for torpedoes and depth charges, the P-8Is primary offensive weapons against submarines had yet to be concluded and therefore, the ASW capability of the aircraft could not be fully met.


The MoD had procured sonobuoys in limited numbers sufficient only for one year instead of three, and not the advanced longer-range version as recommended by the Indian Naval Tactical Evolution Group (INTEG). Sonobuoys, air-dropped devices that float on the water and transmit the location of submarines to the ASW aircraft.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Philip » 08 Aug 2018 11:52

Back from the boondocks.

Vindicated! As I've always maintained,the P-8I was a "sweetheart " deal,part of the covert agreement by Snake-Oil Singh to buy US defence eqpt. like the C-17 (again keeping Boeing's C-17 line running)as a thank you for the N-deal upon which Snake-Oil staked his political legacy.Let's wait for more CAG exposes of the UPA regime.

[b]The aircraft in current form are rather toothless with out adequate radar coverage and no ASW torpedoes,etc.! based upon this fact alone,how was the clearance for the additional 4 aircraft given,and on this below-par performance how can the IN request another 12 aircraft?!

[/b]
The sordid attempts to downgrade non-US milware is however still continuing as the US attempts in every manner to replace Russia and other traditional suppliers,make us totally beholden to it and destroy the nascent indigenous defence industry. BK on the subject.

https://bharatkarnad.com/
The subterranean objectives of STA-1
Posted on August 2, 2018

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Aug 2018 12:20

A photo I took of Kolkata class destroyer with Seaking. Probably the first published photo with Seaking Mk42B onboard https://flic.kr/p/Lae2Ye

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Aug 2018 12:23

And a forwarded photo of a White Tiger with a Lamborghini this weekend https://flic.kr/p/28x8G3R

Video of Lamborghini racing a White Tiger https://flic.kr/p/29QQrkE

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 635
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby ks_sachin » 08 Aug 2018 12:27

Philip wrote:Back from the boondocks.


[/b]Posted on August 2, 2018



We missed you...

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Aug 2018 12:29

Philip wrote:Vindicated!

No

The CAG report is unfactual. It castigates IN for not buying Mk82 bombs which in reality is not required for ASW mission.

India has ordered Mk54 torpedoes

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/in ... -torpedoes

but the long term goal is to qualify similar indigenous TAL torpedoes.

Airbus A-319 ASW is paper plane. India would have to fund development costs. The other option Airbus Spain CASA 235 / 295 have low range and low payload and the number of aircraft required to cover an ocean area would have been more compared to P-8I.

So there was no fudging, in reality more CASA 235 / 295 are required to cover the coverage area of a P-8I.

CAG can validate this by taking Jet Airways or Indigo ATR flights and comparing it with a Boeing 737. Two ATR flights are required to cover the range of a Boeing 737
Last edited by tsarkar on 08 Aug 2018 12:34, edited 1 time in total.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Aug 2018 12:31

ks_sachin wrote:
Philip wrote:Back from the boondocks.[/b]Posted on August 2, 2018
We missed you...

We all love Philip as a friend but Hindi Roosi Bhai Bhai passed away with Raj Kapoor :D

Kersi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Kersi » 08 Aug 2018 12:37

Philip wrote:Back from the boondocks.

Vindicated! As I've always maintained,the P-8I was a "sweetheart " deal,part of the covert agreement by Snake-Oil Singh to buy US defence eqpt. like the C-17 (again keeping Boeing's C-17 line running)as a thank you for the N-deal upon which Snake-Oil staked his political legacy.Let's wait for more CAG exposes of the UPA regime.

[b]The aircraft in current form are rather toothless with out adequate radar coverage and no ASW torpedoes,etc.! based upon this fact alone,how was the clearance for the additional 4 aircraft given,and on this below-par performance how can the IN request another 12 aircraft?!

[/b]
The sordid attempts to downgrade non-US milware is however still continuing as the US attempts in every manner to replace Russia and other traditional suppliers,make us totally beholden to it and destroy the nascent indigenous defence industry. BK on the subject.

https://bharatkarnad.com/
The subterranean objectives of STA-1
Posted on August 2, 2018



ACHTUNG ACHTUNG ACHTUNG

Here comes the Russian T 14 Armata

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 14:05

tsarkar wrote:Airbus A-319 ASW is paper plane. India would have to fund development costs.


That part was vendors risk , if IN felt A-319 and P-8I met their cost and technical criteria then it boiled for MOD for L1 bidding. It was Onus of Airbus to deliver on what they promised.

If Airbus did not meet their criteria they should have outright rejected it and should have opted for just P-8I like they rejected Russian LRMP offer , The fact that IN accepted both and went forward to MOD means they accepted both offer

Now it boiled down to L1 , The charges of CAG is MOD manipulated the cost figures of L1 to favour Boeing offer over Airbus that was grave impropriety by MOD of UPA. Which can either indicate corruption or willfully bending L1 process to favour Boeing

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Singha » 08 Aug 2018 14:16

in reality there was no option.... we don't want to be the lead and only customer of a billion dollar crucial product. vs P8I which will be purchased in 100s by users. kaun hai bhai A319 ko fund karne ke liye ? even france, italy & germany has not funded it, let alone export clients. till date. every capability addition and future work would have to be funded by us also.

P8I was available and ready to roll, with the worlds most advanced navy.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 14:33

If there was no option then why did the navy approve that in first place ? Why was it not rejected along with Russian offer and went for single vendor like C-17 or S-400 ?

The risk to develop was that of airbus the navy accepted the risk and went ahead but mod manipulated L1

Even the so called ready P-8I has serious sensor issue and lacks suitable asw weapon not to mention no offset values met till date

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63100
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Singha » 08 Aug 2018 14:42

To explore the powerpoint slides from vendor and to subdue price gouging by boeing to an extent. as a courtesy to airbus?

There is not 1 a319 asw TD flying today just to prove my point
In past 15 years none have reposed faith in it

what could compete with C17 - there is nothing even as a PPT anywhere else from any OEM. same for S400.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 15:30

Singha wrote:To explore the powerpoint slides from vendor and to subdue price gouging by boeing to an extent. as a courtesy to airbus?

There is not 1 a319 asw TD flying today just to prove my point
In past 15 years none have reposed faith in it

what could compete with C17 - there is nothing even as a PPT anywhere else from any OEM. same for S400.


We dont know what presentation and assurance Airbus gave to Navy and what lead Navy to believe it and same goes for Boeing. What lead Navy to reject the Russian offer is also not known.

So we go by keeping faith in Navy technical evaluation that both Airbus and Boeing met its criteria but Russias offer did not meet the cut.

That criteria went to MOD and MOD deliberately manipulated L1 to favour Boeing. CAG does not any where say Boeing technical offer was better than Airbus or vice verse , It points to deliberate fudging of figures to favour Boeing , So GOI is subverting its own selection criteria.

What is to say Airbus would not have met IN criteria and delivered on the promise at lower cost than Boeing , There is no way to find it out.

Its like MOD/IN felt into its own trap thinking it wont be found out not the current GOI but UPA.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4155
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby Karthik S » 08 Aug 2018 16:39

We have neither gone for inferior equipment, not killed off any Indian project by acquiring phoren maal. As far as the choice of equipment goes, can't say I am too concerned.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1792
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby John » 08 Aug 2018 16:44

tsarkar wrote:A photo I took of Kolkata class destroyer with Seaking. Probably the first published photo with Seaking Mk42B onboard https://flic.kr/p/Lae2Ye

I am only seeing one Ak-630? Do a need a better resolution to confirm it, your thoughts?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2684
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 08 Aug 2018 16:47

Karthik S wrote:We have neither gone for inferior equipment, not killed off any Indian project by acquiring phoren maal. As far as the choice of equipment goes, can't say I am too concerned.


Definitely not the inferior equipment considering the Airbus entry is untested in comparison to the P-8. That saud it could impact upgrades and new weapons packages if this drags out and we cannot do business with Boeing in the meantime.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2684
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby chola » 08 Aug 2018 16:50

BTW. Welcome back, Filipov :D

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Aug 2018 17:01

John wrote:I am only seeing one Ak-630? Do a need a better resolution to confirm it, your thoughts?

All four there, the pollution haze combined with paint scheme blurring the outlines.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bijeet, brar_w, kann and 33 guests