Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

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.
Post Reply
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by nachiket »

Philip wrote: Here is an old Aug.2018 report about the IN getting Karakurt missile corvettes from Ru,doubtful now,but gives an idea about the direction in which the IN is looking.
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ne ... 593432.ece
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov told local media that the Indian Navy could soon get the warships armed with the lethal Kaliber land attack cruise missile that is capable of hitting the enemy 2,500 km away.
The report says nothing about the IN looking for the Karakurt corvettes. It only says that the Russians were interested in selling them. The IN doesn't seem to have paid much heed to them.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

Yea we are talking in circles and needlessly about RuN. Currently we have NGMV that are being built by Cochin that will be 1000-1500 Ton vessels which should help us replace our aging missile boats and better fit our future requirements.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Pratyush »

John,. You are missing the point entirely. Which is, if it's Russian. It has to be bought by India.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Vivek K »

Sad that some posters seem to push their hidden agenda even though it makes India weak and dependent on foreign largesse during wars. India needs to invigorate her shipyards and build new ones to produce multiple ships locally that provide technological leadership and employment to INDIANS. Lusting after every shiny new brochure that foreign nations produce is from an era gone by. Please wake up - you know who this is directed and start behaving like an Indian.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by ks_sachin »

Vivek K wrote:Sad that some posters seem to push their hidden agenda even though it makes India weak and dependent on foreign largesse during wars. India needs to invigorate her shipyards and build new ones to produce multiple ships locally that provide technological leadership and employment to INDIANS. Lusting after every shiny new brochure that foreign nations produce is from an era gone by. Please wake up - you know who this is directed and start behaving like an Indian.
Hidden?!!!!!
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5777
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by SBajwa »

NE menuNIE logo
Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh performs push-ups with National Defence Academy cadets
PTI | Published: 29th May 2021 12:32 AM

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newind ... 308897.amp

Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh (Photo | EPS)
Image
PUNE: It was a passing-out parade at the National Defence Academy (NDA) here like every year, but Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Karambir Singh decided to push the envelop a little further when he did push-ups with cadets.

He was at the NDA on Friday to review the passing-out parade of its 140th course.

Pictures of the Navy chief doing push-ups with cadets soon went viral on social media, wowing netizens.


"It was the CNS who initiated the push-ups with cadets and we all joined in," said NDA Commandant
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

Please! I'm not pushing any "hidden agenda" as much as others always saying Yanqui ware like JSFs are what we need! Please read my posts carefully.
We need to build a new class of corvette below 2000t far better than the Kora class and smaller,.cheaper and with more weaponry than the 3000+ P-28s.If you check the net,there is one vclip showing the top 10 corvettes in the world.I'm giving two illustrations,The Germans have a Braunschweig 2000t class corvette,details below with two UCAVs.We could do with only one helo,and equip the corvette with BMos-NG,SRSAM,etc.as I've spelt out above. Built at home they would also be much cheaper. The UAE have a 1000t Baynunah class corvette .
Preceded by: Gepard class
Cost:
€240 million (2001) per ship (Batch 1)
€400 million (2017) per ship (Batch 2)
Built: 2004–present
In commission: 2008–present
Planned: 10
Building: 3
Completed: 5
Active: 5
General characteristics
Type: Corvette
Displacement: 1,840 tonnes (1,810 long tons)
Length: 89.12 m (292 ft 5 in)
Beam: 13.28 m (43 ft 7 in)
Draft: 3.4 m (11 ft 2 in)
Propulsion: 2 MTU 20V 1163 TB 93 diesel engines producing 14.8MW, driving two controllable-pitch propellers.
Speed: 26 knots (48 km/h; 30 mph)
Range: 4,000 nmi (7,400 km) at 15 kn (28 km/h; 17 mph)[1]
Endurance: 7 days; 21 days with tender[2]
Complement: 65 : 1 commander, 10 officers, 16 chief petty officers, 38 enlisted
Sensors and
processing systems:
Cassidian TRS-3D multifunction Passive electronically scanned array C-Band radar
2 navigation radars
MSSR 2000 i IFF system
MIRADOR electro-optical sensors
UL 5000 K ESM suite
Link 11 and Link 16 communications
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
2 × TKWA/MASS (Multi Ammunition Softkill System) decoy launcher
UL 5000 K ECM suite
Armament:
Guns;
1 × OTO Melara 76 mm gun[2][3]
2 × Mauser BK-27 autocannons
Anti-ship;
4 × RBS-15 Mk.3 anti-ship missiles
Close-In Weapon System:
2 × RAM Block II launchers, 21 missiles each
Mine laying capability; 2 mine racks of 34 naval mines Mk 12
Aircraft carried:Helicopter pad and hangar for two Saab Skeldar
Now see how heavily armed are the UAE's Baynunah class corvette of just under 1000t!
Baynunah-class corvette Al Dhafra P-173 at NAVDEX.JPG
Baynunah-class corvette Al Dhafra at NAVDEX, February 2015
Class overview
Builders:
Constructions Mécaniques de Normandie (lead ship only)
Abu Dhabi Ship Building
Operators: United Arab Emirates Navy
Preceded by: Ardhana-class patrol craft
Planned: 6
Completed: 6
Active: 6
General characteristics
Type: Corvette
Displacement: 915 tons[1]
Length: 71.3 m (233 ft 11 in)
Beam: 11 m (36 ft 1 in)
Draft: 2.8 m (9 ft 2 in)
Propulsion:
4 × MTU 12V595 TE90 diesel engines
3 × Kamewa Waterjets models 112S11 and 125B11
Speed: 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph)+
Range: 2,400 nmi (4,400 km; 2,800 mi) at 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph)
Endurance: 14 days
Complement: 37
Sensors and
processing systems:
Saab Microwave Systems Sea Giraffe AMB surveillance radar
Terma I-band navigation radar
Selex Orion RTN 25 Fire Control X-band radar
NDS 3070 Vanguard hull-mounted mine and obstacle avoidance sonar
Armament:
1 × OTO Melara 76 mm/62 caliber naval gun
2 × Rheinmetall MLG 27 27 mm guns
4 × Mk 56 dual-pack VLS with 8 × RIM-162 ESSM
1 × Mk 49 mod3 21-cell RAM launcher for RAM block 1A missile system
8 × MBDA MM40 block 3 Exocet missiles

Aviation facilities: Aft helicopter deck and hangar
Notes: Cost, as of February 2009, is US$820 million for the entire 6 ship programme.[2]
So for just 1000t,you get a corvette equipped with Exocet SSMs,SAMs,an ASW helo and hangar,a 76mm Otomat main gun, which the IN is used to,. Imagine an extra 500 to 1000t ,what could be added. Greater range and endurance,etc., ASW TTs plus Paket type hard-kill anti-torpedo systems, a better SSM,BMos-NG, 30mm gatlings replacing the German 27mm guns,even Nirbhay/LRCM/SMART missiles too or a UCAV,plus UUVs instead.Depending upon what role was primary. I would plump for the anti-sub warfare role as primary along with anti-ship capability plus integral anti-missile defences. Assuming costs have gone up by say 30%, it still is just around $150M per ship {UAE}. We could build our corvettes at around $ $150-200M a pop.10 for just $2B. The 7 P-17As have been approved for a cost of $7B,$1B each!
We could easily afford a dozen+ such corvettes which could operate at several places in the IOR+ simultaneously, where only 2-3 P-17As could.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

Philip I am still lost what is your point? We are already getting NGMV which will be a 1500-2000 tons vessel. At the moment no one can understand what your argument is.

So once again trying to decipher what you are saying, You want a another 1000 Ton missile corvette like Baynunah along with NGMV?? Baynunah simply cannot accommodate anything other than Exocet/Harpoon which is not even 1/4th size of Brahmos or even Klub in their canister. And the NGMV on paper will be better armed faster and cheaper than this.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

The NGMV doesn't have any ASW capability worth a bumboat. It is a new gen. missile boat/corvette replacing the Tarantulas and only 6 are on order.The ASW warfare threat is going to be the greatest in the coming future.Our 16 ASW shallow water (inshore) corvettes do not have any blue water capability at all,only 700t. They cannot prosecute enemy subs with 200-300km missiles operating in deeper waters off our coastline.I have merely given 2 examples of the UAE and German Navy's corvettes tonnage ranging from 1000t to 2000t and the extensive armament aboard. Please read my posts carefully and the armament I've suggested for our corvette,don't jump to conclusions. Once again,BMos-NG,SRSAM,both in the pipeline,main gun76mm, 30mm gatlings or BPDMS,an MBU, ASW TTs,ASW helo, plus if possible a UAV and UUVs. Our Koras of just 1000t have 16 Uran SSMs,plus a helo deeck,gatlings and a main gun.An extra 500-1000t of hull can carry a lot more.'

I have also given approx. costing for the same showing how many corvettes we can of 1500-2000t acquire against just one P-17A which costs $1B.
Please understand how small and ancient our sub fleet is with all SSBNs going for our strat. deterrent which also require a few SSNs to protect them.
We will have only 6 Scorpenes as new subs by 2004,with around only another 6 30 yr. old upgraded Kilos with second refits,operational by 2030. Our 4 U-boats would also have perished by then.There is NO P-75I on the horizon, perhaps only by 2030-2035 at our current sub-building rate.The IN has got its knickers in a twist,stuck indecisively with this project just like OZ expecting a conventional boat to do the biz of an SSN! Pak will have 8+ new Yuan class SSGs, in addition to a few Agosta 90B AIP subs-none of our boats have AIP, plus several Chin subs stationed at Gwadar,Djibouti,Sri Lanka,etc.A combination of air,surface and UW assets are reqd.,the more the better. Examples given given before of how many assets are reqd. to prosecute just one sub. WE took 21 days after Balakot to find just one Paki AIP sub.Please read my earlier posts, extensive details given before.

PS:The bulk of our capital ships will be part of our carrier task forces,with at least 2 DDGs and 2FFGs in concert. The island territories have to be defences too apart from our main coastal bases,industrial centres from Sino-Paki naval attack. Given the spread of China bases in the IOR,etc., plus our commitments to Mauritius,etc., the IN will have its forces streteched quite a bit.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

Philip wrote:It is a new gen. missile boat/corvette replacing the Tarantulas and only 6 are on order.The ASW warfare threat is going to be the greatest in the coming future.
At this point you just rambling just for sake of rambling can a mod just go thru and clean up last few posts. Neither vessel you mentioned ( Baynunah and Braunschweig ) are ASW vessels ( K130 has no torpedo tubes or sonars) and all of sudden you bring them up.

You could have just said let’s focus on inducting on more NGMV you could have made your point and moved on. But you want to somehow tie it with some Russian vessel (Gerard) or even some foreign vessel we need to buy even though those reqs are fulfilled by NGMV which at this point we know very little about.

NGMV has point defense SAM, 8 Brahmos, main gun, CIWS and its complement seems to indicate a vessel that is 1500 tons+ in size and high speed (not many vessels that size can do 35+ knots) indicates use of power gas turbines. And there is lot of unknowns (like whether they have any hanger) but from what we know so they are lot more than just tarantula a class replacement as you suggested stated to admonish the vessel.

FYI funny thing is Braunschweig corvette you brought up makes my point of what happens when you try to fit too much armaments into small vessel, K130 corvette costs as much P-17a :rotfl:
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

John,you seem to want to put words into my mouth to suit you biased agenda not understanding the issues I've raised.You scarcely read my posts in full. Mods should instead stop this troll who has nothing worthwhile to contribute but nitpick continuously. Where have I said anything about the Gepard? It's all in your imagination.NGMV has been stated to replace the Tarantulas and only as I said 6 are on order. They cannot fill the role which will be the major one in the future ASW. Even the US has grasped the future challenge from Ru and Chinese subs and is once again giving ASW the priority it deserves after the CW ended. The P-28s are too large,too expensive,take too long to build and are poorly weaponised.I've given a solution which is very relevant.You can have your own opinion,but I stand by mine which will be vindicated in the future.

PS: And the capability of our 4 P-28s today.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india-today-i ... 2020-10-26
Missing teeth | India Today Insight
The Indian Navy’s four Kamorta class corvettes pass the Atmanirbharta test, but missing weapons and sensors mean it will be some years before they are fully functional
Sandeep Unnithan
Delhi
October 26, 2020UPDATED: October 28, 2020
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

Here's the damning indictment by the CAG on the P-28 fiasco,please read the entire report in the link. The DND has a lot to answer for.

https://cag.gov.in/uploads/download_aud ... efence.pdf
The role of ASW Corvettes envisaged
(a) Provide ASW capability to Carrier Battle Group (CBG);
(b) Operate and control integral ASW helicopters;
(c) Function as ASW Surveillance Control Platforms;
CHAPTER II
Report No.19 of 2017
11
(d) Provide ASW protection to merchantmen on main shipping routes
approaching home ports; and
(e) Search, locate and destroy submarines in designated areas.
The indigenous Weapons and Sensors fit included Hull Mounted Sonar
(HUMSA), Active Towed Array Sonar (ATAS), Advanced Torpedo Defence
System (ATDS), Under Water Telephone (UWT), Bathy Thermograph (XBT)
and ASW Fire Control System. The ship would carry torpedoes, two rocket
launchers, hello borne torpedoes and depth launchers. Corvettes were designed
to incorporate stealth features to minimise underwater noise, Radar Cross
Section and Infra-red emissions. The ship would also have one Advanced
Light Helicopter (ALH) and telescopic stowage hanger for accommodating a
Seaking Type helicopter.
The planned induction (of four ASW Corvettes during X Plan between 2002-
03 and 2006-07 and XI Plan between 2007-08 and 2011-12) was to partially
compensate the reduction in ASW capabilities due to decommissioning of
three ASW frigates and ten ASW ships
.
Reply is not convincing as the single vendors on whom GRSE placed orders
delayed the supplies.The delay had a significant impact on the Anti-submarine
warfare capabilities of the Indian Navy. Though the ASW capability of the
Indian Navy was severely depleted considering decommissioning of Petya
class ASW Corvettes by 2003 and decommissioning of Leander/Nilgiri class
Frigates with ASW capabilities by 2012, the first ASW Corvette was delivered
only in July 2014 without major Defence and Offence capabilities.
2.1.4.2. Increase in weight and decrease in speed levels
The Build Specification of ASW Corvette released in July 2003 specified a
displacement of 2500 tonnes and achievement of maximum speed of 25 knots7
and cruising speed of 18 knots at ambient temperature of 400C.
Further during the Controllerate Project Review Meeting (CPRM) held in
September 2005, GRSE was informed to put an effective weight control
mechanism in place so that the displacement does not exceed 2500 Tonnes.
However, GRSE clarified (November 2005) that it was not in a position to
ensure stipulated weight through design as the construction of the ASW
Corvettes were as per the Navy approved SOTRs8
. At the time of signing of
the contract in June 2012, MoD increased the requirement of displacement to
3170 tonnes.
Audit observed that the actual displacement of the first two Corvettes (3017
and 3018) delivered was 3384 and 3490 tonnes which exceeded even the
enhanced displacement by 214 and 329 tonnes respectively. Further, the
maximum speed and cruising speed achieved was 23.9 knots on the first ASW
Corvette (3017) and 22.8 knots on the second ASW Corvette (3018)
respectively. The drop in the achievement of the specified speed was mainly
on account of increase in weight of the ASW Corvette by over 800 tonnes
from initial envisaged 2500 tonnes.

Management agreed (December 2016) that the reduction in speed
MoD intended to overcome the depletion in the force level especially in the field
of Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) considering the Nation’s security
environment and threat perception.
Considering that India did not possess Advanced Anti-Submarine Warfare
Corvettes, MoD envisaged that about X ASW ships in each battle group were
required. MoD placed an order for construction and delivery of four indigenous
ASW Corvettes on GRSE which were to be delivered between 2008 and 2012.
However, GRSE delivered only two Corvettes in July 2014 and November 2015.
Further, even the ASW Corvettes delivered to the Indian Navy were not fully
equipped with some of the major missiles systems and launchers, impacting the
capability to effectively counter the underwater threat in the Indian Oceans.
Hence, the role of ASW Corvettes i.e. capacity to provide Anti-Submarine
Warfare support to Carrier Battle Group; operate and control integral ASW
helicopters, provide ASW Surveillance Control Platforms; provide ASW
protection to merchantmen on main shipping routes approaching home ports and
to search, locate and destroy submarines in designated areas could not be
achieved.
The final judgement on the P-28s.Therefore with them unable to perform their designated role of ASW effectively,and only 4 in the fleet,one can see that there is a crying need for more ASW corvettes of lesser dpl. In fact,if you read the report of the CAG, along with other reports,the P-28s initially were to have been of only 1800t dpl.13 ASW capable FFGs were decommissioned,read the first xcpt. again and the 4 P-28s were to partly meet the shortfall. The gap still exists and boodle is scarce for larger ships costing upwards of $1B a pop,even the extra 4 Talwars we're getting from Ru and Goa built ones. Hence my viewpoint.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

Philip I do not think people can follow what your saying first you speak of 700 ton AsuW corvette (Bayun) then you talk about multi purpose heavily armed corvette and now you are going off on ASW corvette.

Note: My mistake on Gepard you linked K130 but looks there was html element for Gepard so it seemed like you linking its specs (Preceded by: Gepard class).

On your last point of ASW vessels: a mixture of inshore ASW corvettes and air borne assets (P-8 and UAV) can address ASW needs (was never fan of P-28 to start with), it is not cost effective to build large specialized ASW surface combatants like during Cold War especially with emergence of UAVs.

Going back to your two comparisons (UAE and German vessel) neither have any ASW capability and they actually illustrate Challenges faced with P-28. As expected any multi purpose corvette will be expensive and there is only so much you can fit in small platform. And as I had said earlier K-130 cost over 600 mill Euros each which actually makes P-28 look very cheap by comparison.

On a interesting note UAE found Baynunah to be ineffective (plans to purchase more were canned and Kuwait/Saudi backed off from buying them as well). To be better face threats in Yemen conflict UAE is going for 2 Frigates being built by france.

So to wrap it all up there is no such platform that is a heavily armed ASW corvette (so a multi purpose corvette in other words) that costs around 100-200 mill out there.

Let’s leave the discussion at that and move on.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

Fair enough,I was only showing the range of corvette designs available from 1000t to 2000tRu ones well known,and our ASW warfare problem with lack of vessels and P-28's limited performance.

Here's an interesting analysis of our CVs compared with those of the Chins.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -to-china/
XCpts:
Home»News»Indian Navy’s First Indigenous Aircraft Carrier Vikrant Catching Up To China
Aircraft Carriers compared
Although the Indian carrier is smaller, the two ships are broadly comparable.
Indian Navy’s First Indigenous Aircraft Carrier Vikrant Catching Up To China
The Chinese Navy is rapidly expanding its aircraft carrier fleet, with two in service and at least one more under construction. And while still new to the game, their experience of operating carriers is growing all the time. Regional rival India has a much longer tradition of carrier aviation, but fewer and smaller carriers. The first indigenous aircraft carrier, Vikrant, could keep India competitive however.
H I Sutton 30 May 2021
At 45,000 tons the Vikrant will be around 67% the size of China’s existing aircraft carriers, which displace around 65,000 tons. But her compact dimensions belie capabilities which are overall quite comparable to China’s first two carriers, the Liaoning (CV-16) and Shandong. And her deck area is around 85% of the size.


Like the Chinese ships, Vikrant’s construction has been followed closely by OSINT (Open Source intelligence) analysts.
Although the construction of the Indian and Chinese ships overlaps, in many respects the Indian carrier is a generation newer in design. Design of Vikrant started in 1999 while the Chinese ships are rooted in 1970s Soviet technology. Vikrant was launched in August 2013 and has been fitting out in Kochi since then.

The Chinese ships however are essentially Soviet designed Admiral Kuznetsov class ships. Liaoning in fact was laid down in 1985 and only sold to China, ostensibly for scrap, in 1998. She entered service in 2012. Shandong was built to the same overall design (with some modifications) and entered service in 2019.

The differences are most telling under the deck however. The Chinese ships use traditional steam turbines while Vikrant uses a more modern gas turbine arrangement.

Both Liaoning and Shandong are already operational however. While China’s experience in aircraft carrier operations is much younger than India’s, it is now more than 8 years since Liaoning was commissioned. She is currently exercising off Qingdao in the Yellow Sea.

Air Wings
The Chinese carrier’s main combat aircraft is the Shenyang J-15 Flanker-D, a reverse-engineered copy of the Sukhoi Su-33. Like other Chinese Flanker derivatives the J-15 is equipped with a range of Chinese air-air missiles including the PL-12 beyond visual range missile. They can also carry anti-ship missiles and land-attack missiles.

The Flanker is a large aircraft however. India has opted for the mid-sized MiG-29K Fulcrum two-seat carrier-borne fighter instead. Consequently, despite the size difference, the vessels have a similar air wing size.

The Indian Navy is looking at a more modern fighter to replace the Fulcrums. The main contender is the Hal TEDBF (Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter). This compact canard design is hoped to fly in 5 years time. In the meantime the Indian Navy may order a smaller number of interim carrier fighters with the Boeing Super Hornet and Dassault Rafale as talked about contenders.

Both the country’s carriers are expected to have organic airborne early warning (AEW) capabilities. The Indian Navy via the Ka-31 Helix helicopter and the Chinese with the Z-18J helicopter. Helicopter based early warning may greatly increase air defense and situational awareness of the respective carrier battle groups but it is inherently more limited than fixed-wing types.

China has developed a fixed wing AEW plane, the Xi’an KJ-600. This is closely analogous to the carrier-borne E-2D Hawkeye in American and, soon, French Navy service. However it is not expected to serve aboard Liaoning or Shandong because they lack the catapult launch system. China’s third carrier is expected to have catapults for this aircraft however.

The third carrier, which is known to be larger than the Liaoning and Shandong, is likely to bring in new naval fighters too. China is capable of developing 5 generation aircraft so it may only be a matter of time before the J-15ds are replaced. It is likely that the new type would also be carried by the first two carriers.
PS:Sutton makes one error in saying that our 29Ks are two-seaters.He also hasn't realised that the two CVs we have do not have lifts large enough for either Rafale-Ms or SHs.

Given the number of 29Ks,enough for equipping two Cvs, even after the TEDBF arrives hopefully by 2030, the 29Ks can easily serve for another decade and will surely at sometime during this decade get upgrades from MIG-35/LCA tech. Therefore,once the new carrier fighter emerges,the stock of MIG-29Ks can be used primarily aboard the Vik-A which was specifically designed for it.The Vik-2 designed form scratch as a regular flat top has more flexibility,a wider deck,etc. Sometime this decade a call has to be taken as to the next CV for the IN.By then,the advent of UCAVs operating from CMs will be the RMA in carrier evolution. As said often ,leveraging our 2 X 35K t amphibs with a suitable flat top/ ski-jump s in the JC class, to carry a fighter wing when reqd. will augment the availability of carrier fighter aircraft at sea for the IN.

PPS:I often wonder that if the IN had simply asked for a second sister CV to the Vik-2,with some mods,a bit bigger with bigger lifts, integral missile defences ,etc..it would've passed the CCS without too much of effort,since the experience and infra of building IAC-1 had been proven. Aspiring to be in the champions league like the US asking for EMALS,etc..etc., sank the same. That desire for a larger CV probably was due in part to push and shove from the USN wanting to sell its SHs to the IN and integrate the CV into the USN's battle plan for the Quad.

Once we establish the requisite infra for 3-D warfare from both the ANC and LDW,with sev. airstrips,anchorages and logistics for berthing CVs,subs,etc., the footprint of the IN will dramatically extend into both compass points of the IO,with Agalega too under our sole control to monitor the E.African coastline.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 228795.cms
Indian Navy's Hydrographic survey ship INS Sandhayak to be decommissioned today
ET Online|04 Jun 2021
INS Sandhayak, the first of its class indigenously designed and built Hydrographic Survey Ship of Indian Navy, will be decommissioned today after serving the nation for 40 years. The decommissioning ceremony of INS Sandhayak will be held at Naval Dockyard Visakhapatnam and will be a low-key event attended only by in-station officers and sailors with strict observance of COVID protocols.

A long history

Sandhayak was conceptualised by then Chief Hydrographer to the Government of India, Rear Adm FL Fraser who had a strong desire for indigenously designed and built hydrographic survey vessels in India. The design was finalised by Naval Headquarters and the construction of the ship began at GRSE Kolkata (then Calcutta) by laying the keel in 1978. The ship was commissioned to the Indian Navy on February 26 1981 by Vice Adm MK Roy, then Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief Eastern Naval Command (ENC).

200 major Hydrographic Surveys
Since commissioning, she has been the alma-mater nurturing the hydrographers of the Indian Navy thereby laying the foundation of complete hydrographic coverage of the peninsular waters. Also, the success of her design paved the way for all the survey ships of the Indian Navy in various modifications till recently. The ship, during her commissioned service, has undertaken approximately 200 major Hydrographic Surveys and numerous minor surveys in both East and West coasts of the country, the Andaman seas and the neighbouring countries too.

Involved in multiple missions
Apart from Survey Missions, the ship has been an active participant in many significant operations such as Op Pawan – assisting the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka in 1987, Op Sarong, Op Rainbow - rendering humanitarian assistance post Tsunami of 2004 and participation in maiden joint INDO-US HADR Exercise ‘Tiger-Triumph’.
PS:On a personal note ,the late R.Adm.Frank Fraser,a relative, was a visionary hydrographer of the IN,typical of the leadership of the IN in those years like Adm.RL Pereira,extremely proud of his Godavari FFG clas and who was responsible for the birth of the sub-building history of the IN with the German U-boats,sadly trashed by Weepy Singh and co. Another former chief,Adm.Stan Dawson was the visionary who was responsible for our most important new naval base at Karwar,Project Sea Bird,INS Kadamba.These leaders of that generation, wanted to build a new homebuilt navy for the IN and laid the foundation for the same,which has been superbly built upon by successive chiefs and naval planners.

I remember when R.Adm.Fraser was a Capt.,then CO of INS Investigator,the IN's legendary hydrographic ship (I was a young schoolboy then),dining aboard the ship in his wardroom,with his officers and crew explaining to me earlier the various eqpt. arpund the ship,radar,sonar,etc. We were staying with Frank and family in their naval apartment on Colaba Causeway,then no Nariman Point.Backbay reclamation in existence.You looked out from the long verandahs of the apartment across the Backbay towards Malabar Hill,verdant and green not a tall building in sight! Frank took me on his scooter to the Prince of Wales Museum which was a great experience never having seen such a large and grand museum before.Bombay was another planet in those days.While we were with the Frasers in Bombay,a training aircraft or flying club aircraft went missing and had crashed into the sea,location unknown. INS Investigator and Capt.Fraser were immediately off to search for the wreckage.Amazingly he found it within 48 hrs.,said it was a stroke of luck,but he was being modest,he explained to me how he had estimated the aircraft's flight path,time of losing contact and calculated his radius of search. After retirement,he was chosen as President of the International Hydrographic Organization at Monaco, a v.prestigious international post.

Sadly,Indian hydrographers today aren't getting their international due,if you read the following article.It gives a concise description of the importance of hydrography and its history in the Indian context from the days of Vasco da Gama.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archi ... cean-19710
Charting the enigmatic Indian ocean
The Make-in-India tag is hardly a year old. But, for more than 49 years before that, mariners of the world have placed their trust on the high-precision products created in Uttarakhand
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

The next boat will have VLS for a range of LR LACMs and anti-ship missiles,plus a variety of torpedoes,decoys,etc. While the hull may be of an Akula,a lot of eqpt. will be more advanced found on the latest Ru SSGNs. I would even conjecture that if the hull of the Chakra is fine, it may undergo a refit and return considerably upgraded or another ex- Ru Akula replace it. Our 6 SSNs will not appear anywhere before 2030. Even the P-75Is,if a deal is done in late 2022, will materialise only by the decade end if we're lucky if the boats have to be built in India going by Scorpene experience and these boats will be around 3,000t like the Kilos,but perhaps with only a single hull.

Also remember that our secret N-sub base coming up at Rambili is being constructed with Ru assisstance. Our SSBN programme too has large Ru assistance. So the figs. put out for the cost may incorporate many other items unspecified,classified for obvious reasons.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

The IN was very keen on the naval rafale but the russkies were not amenable to giving us a carrier capable of embarking anything larger than the 29Ks

The IN even tried for the naval sukhois to assuage the russki allergy to the french fighter but that too was negated by the russkis who only wanted to and went on to develop the 29K for their requirement using our money.

If you sit with a huge cache of foreign exchange reserves and also have a massive free market doing well, then many, including the amerikis, the russkis, the french, the britshits, the israelis et al and particularly the rapacious, salivating clowns in the EU parliament, all have their greedy eyes locked on to the khazana.

But as India gains in strategic visibility, and military capability, as well as, in international stature, the earlier desire to mess with India has lessened in direct proportion to the influence of her stable markets and the huge opportunities afforded by FDI and the expected returns from such financial participation. The eyrabs, eyeranians and the gelfies know that India has now outgrown them and is now out of reach of their grubby shia, sunni, sharia grasp and have reconciled themselves to it because they simply cannot afford negate such a huge market.

the britshits are still very hopeful of flogging their "second" carrier to India because they simply do not have the means to induct it into their own navy and there is no other customer for such big ticket items except India and they very badly need the money

with the exception of the russkis, no one else is willing to sell us a carrier or a nuke sub complete with all the trimmings on the menu
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Thank you Chetak for confirming that the IN’s preference is the Rafale M. Eyebrows were raised when Vice Admiral G Ashok Kumar showed up at a Rafale ceremony for the IAF in France. The buzz and question was —> why is HE here?

Makes sense for the GOI to deal with one OEM instead of two. Also better logistically. Now whether that actually pans out is a different story and has yet be written.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Vips »

chetak wrote: with the exception of the russkis, no one else is willing to sell us a carrier or a nuke sub complete with all the trimmings on the menu
Chetakji things have changed now. Both UK and US will sell us a carrier, but the cost will be truly exorbitant. Even for the Nuclear Subs French have offered all help to collaborate. Again cost will be a huge factor.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

Vips wrote:
chetak wrote: with the exception of the russkis, no one else is willing to sell us a carrier or a nuke sub complete with all the trimmings on the menu
Chetakji things have changed now. Both UK and US will sell us a carrier, but the cost will be truly exorbitant. Even for the Nuclear Subs French have offered all help to collaborate. Again cost will be a huge factor.
Vips saar,

It will, at best, be an "export" variant, one that is completely defanged and dumbed down with tame pussycat aircraft.

they will not allow russki or israeli missiles and other such systems to be fitted on them. we will have to drink their alphabet soup agreements all over again

It will become a perpetual cash cow for their MIC and subject to political blackmail and sanctions from unreliable and tempermental democrats as well as republicans
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

chetak wrote:The IN was very keen on the naval rafale but the russkies were not amenable to giving us a carrier capable of embarking anything larger than the 29Ks
That’s not true we requested those specs and Rafale was never seriously considered at the time because navy couldn’t support them by itself. Also Russia was not willing to give the carrier for free (don’t worry they would charge for it later) if we didn’t buy Mig-29k. If he had known IAF would be purchasing Rafale we could have gone for Rafale-M and simply procured a squadron of mig-29k to appease Russians. As much as I love to blame the Russians the blame falls on navy and IAF for Lack of coordination and planning.

chetak wrote:The IN even tried for the naval sukhois to assuage the russki allergy to the french fighter but that too was negated by the russkis who only wanted to and went on to develop the 29K for their requirement using our money.
Su-27k is very constrained operating from a ski jump and its track record with the Chinese/Russians is far worse hence mig-29k was the better choice for Groskhov operations. Also some hints that Chinese were not willing to allow Russia to sell it to us as they had essentially bought the design under the table.


As for UK or US selling carrier tech, I have never heard of latter willing to sell us that other than amphibious vessels which is not the same thing. UK working with us on an another Queen Elizabeth class is unlikely primarily because of UK politicians who won’t be too happy and also $$$ I honestly don’t see how navy can afford 6+ billion vessel on top of additional cost for radar + armaments which will be installed locally.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chola »

chetak wrote:The IN was very keen on the naval rafale but the russkies were not amenable to giving us a carrier capable of embarking anything larger than the 29Ks

The IN even tried for the naval sukhois to assuage the russki allergy to the french fighter but that too was negated by the russkis who only wanted to and went on to develop the 29K for their requirement using our money.

If you sit with a huge cache of foreign exchange reserves and also have a massive free market doing well, then many, including the amerikis, the russkis, the french, the britshits, the israelis et al and particularly the rapacious, salivating clowns in the EU parliament, all have their greedy eyes locked on to the khazana.

But as India gains in strategic visibility, and military capability, as well as, in international stature, the earlier desire to mess with India has lessened in direct proportion to the influence of her stable markets and the huge opportunities afforded by FDI and the expected returns from such financial participation. The eyrabs, eyeranians and the gelfies know that India has now outgrown them and is now out of reach of their grubby shia, sunni, sharia grasp and have reconciled themselves to it because they simply cannot afford negate such a huge market.

the britshits are still very hopeful of flogging their "second" carrier to India because they simply do not have the means to induct it into their own navy and there is no other customer for such big ticket items except India and they very badly need the money

with the exception of the russkis, no one else is willing to sell us a carrier or a nuke sub complete with all the trimmings on the menu
Except for the Kuznetsov itself, the Russians had nothing that would have allowed us to embark anything but the 29K. They wanted to keep the Kutz but wanted to remake and sell the Gorshkov. They also wanted funds for the 29K's development. Thus the deal for the Vikramaditya is perfect from the Russian standpoint. For us, it is what is -- a working carrier converted from a cruiser that is specifically geared for the 29K.

The real disappointment is in the design for the Vikrant, especially its lifts. It is a brand new and superior blueprint that we've somehow allowed the Russians through their design of the aviation complex had restricted the carrier fighter once again to the MiG-29 (unless drastic changes were made to lifts or competing aircraft.)

Vikrant with Rafale-M or SHornets would be superior to any non-Western carrier until the Type 003 comes online. With the 29K onlee then it will be better than the VikA (better deck layout) but only marginally flying the same aircraft.

The QE/PoW is a waste of time and treasure. A 65K ton STOBAR? Unless we go full in on the F-35B (if even offered) then we are far, far better off with the IN's 65K ton CATOBAR proposal.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

John wrote:
chetak wrote:The IN was very keen on the naval rafale but the russkies were not amenable to giving us a carrier capable of embarking anything larger than the 29Ks
That’s not true we requested those specs and Rafale was never seriously considered at the time because navy couldn’t support them by itself. Also Russia was not willing to give the carrier for free (don’t worry they would charge for it later) if we didn’t buy Mig-29k. If he had known IAF would be purchasing Rafale we could have gone for Rafale-M and simply procured a squadron of mig-29k to appease Russians. As much as I love to blame the Russians the blame falls on navy and IAF for Lack of coordination and planning.

chetak wrote:The IN even tried for the naval sukhois to assuage the russki allergy to the french fighter but that too was negated by the russkis who only wanted to and went on to develop the 29K for their requirement using our money.
Su-27k is very constrained operating from a ski jump and its track record with the Chinese/Russians is far worse hence mig-29k was the better choice for Groskhov operations. Also some hints that Chinese were not willing to allow Russia to sell it to us as they had essentially bought the design under the table.


As for UK or US selling carrier tech, I have never heard of latter willing to sell us that other than amphibious vessels which is not the same thing. UK working with us on an another Queen Elizabeth class is unlikely primarily because of UK politicians who won’t be too happy and also $$$ I honestly don’t see how navy can afford 6+ billion vessel on top of additional cost for radar + armaments which will be installed locally.

In 1998, the rusting ukrainian aircraft carrier hulk varyag was sold at auction in ukraine for $20 million, to a shady company in macau and the cheeni finally got their hands on the rotting Varyag and it underwent modernization and refit including some rebuild which enabled her to emerge phoenix like in her new avatar as she is now known, the Liaoning

BTW, the Soviet carriers Kiev and Minsk had also been sold to the cheenis as "tourist attractions". The Kiev and Minsk had both operated the Yak-38 series VTOL aircraft

the sly cheeni had acquired immensely cheaply, three russki carriers to examine, poke around and to essentially gain design and construction insights that had taken the russkis many decades to perfect.

The cheeni thus had three fairly intact russki carriers and most of their machinery to study, inspect, dissect and copy and that is how they virtually refitted and rebuilt the varyag into the Liaoning. No design was sold to them. The hans however had three carriers to poke into and study at leisure which is better than having the plans.

Incidentally, when the varyag was still in a very good condition, she was offered to India as well as china and russia too but in India, the powers that be said no.

The cheenis and the russkis also said no but the cheeni were playing the long game.

The ukrainians simply abandoned the varyag and left her to rot while the cheenis waited patiently like vultures. Finally, after some years, they picked up the abandoned varyag at an auction where they had a shell company bid USD$20 million

the britshits have been pushing the Queen Elizabeth class carrier, but India will have none of it. these guys have been shafting us since independence by pushing junk on to us. They refused to sell us the systems we wanted and that is why we had to finally go to the soviets for systems and platforms which encompassed the whole gamut from submarines to major war vessels to frontline fighters, missiles and tanks. Today the britshits are beggars who have become outcasts wherever they go, clinging on to anachronisms like the commonwealth to show their public that they are still relevant. Their royals rarely come to India officially because they fear the humiliation

This britshit carrier is coming to an Indian port fairly soon and you can bet that they will be again pushing it then. she is scheduled to show the flag in this part of the world as part of her "operational" deployment. They are hoping to recoup some of the costs that went into building the present carrier by trying to flog the next one if they can find a customer foolish enough to buy it. So if they do not find a sucker, there are bright chances that they may not even build the second carrier.

BTW, The Queen Elizabeth class is a class of two aircraft carriers of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy

there seems to be some sort of fear in the ameriki MIC eco system to have the S-400 and the F-35 operating in the same theater. One wonders why that is. That is one of the main reasons that the amerikis objected to the turki S-400 purchase because a few NATO airforces have/will get the F-35

In India, they have been pushing the sales of the F-35 of late, because India did not show any interest in purchasing their well past sell by dated items like the dusted off, freshly lipsticked, dented, and repainted "teens", so the S-400 is a big problem for them. The amerikis have been trying to flog many of their older systems to us thinking that we will jump at the chance to buy anything ameriki including the ford Model T. These crooked jokers are either culturally naive or maybe culturally arrogant in so many western supremacist ways.

No one in the Indian forces is happy with ameriki equipment. The amerikis are untrustworthy as a country and also as chameleon like allies who will sanction us at the drop of the proverbial hat and for the flimsiest of reasons too.

So, even if offered a carrier, we simply cannot risk buying a carrier from either the US or the UK no matter how good the deal may seem. The US has never offered to sell any carrier to us so far but with the proposed induction of the much smaller "fleet" carriers, that situation may change.

Look at the beautifully choreographed song and dance performance that went on with the steam catapult and the EMALS technology on "offer" and then we signed happily on the dotted line with all those alphabet soup agreements.

when the amerikis want something from you, they will dangle the most attractive bait and the old fogies in the respective defence HQs get all excited

the IN has been eyeing the rafale much before the AF became keen on them. Naval rafales are much more expensive compared to the AF ones just like the IAF and the IN MiG 29s are very different aircraft and practically from different generations with very little in common and even the engines are not the same.
SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 546
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by SNaik »

China purchased Varyag together with plans. Shipyard copy. It is not confirmed, but they may have got shipyard copy of Ulyanovsk as well ;) I remember seeing a list of documentation transferred to China, I recall there were some items for nuclear propulsion on that list.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

!

Post by Philip »

At that time in history,the Rafale wasn't even on the radar of the IAF! Western eqpt. hadn't yet been offered to India.The US is having large problems with the F-35,have to supply their own allies first with AC and are already studying concepts for its cheaper and less complicated successor.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/04 ... cs-system/
F-35 program office announces a ‘strategic pause’ on new logistics system
By: Valerie Insinna   April 22

U.S. Airmen from the 380th Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron prepare to launch an F-35A Lightning II assigned to the 4th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron at Al Dhafra Air Base, United Arab Emirates, April 24, 2019. F-35 maintainers use the Autonomic Logistics Information System to monitor the health of the joint strike fighter. (Staff Sgt. Chris Drzazgowski/U.S. Air Force)
WASHINGTON — The Defense Department is pausing its efforts to field replacement software for the F-35′s troubled logistics system due to a lack of funding, the head of the F-35 program office said Thursday.

In 2020, the F-35 program executive office announced plans to develop a replacement for the Lockheed Martin-made Autonomic Logistics Information System currently used by maintenance crews to perform functions such as ordering spare parts or logging repair work.

Known as the Operational Data Integrated Network, or ODIN, the new system would combine hardware produced by Lockheed with software coded by the government, allowing the Defense Department to retain more control over the system.

But because of a 42 percent cut to ODIN’s development and testing funding in fiscal year 2021, the program office has decided to take a “strategic pause” in ODIN’s software development effort, said Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, F-35 program executive officer.

“Despite all the positive activities, we underestimated the complexity of deprecating ALIS capabilities while migrating to ODIN and learned several important lessons,” Fick said in April 22 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee.

For years, ALIS has ranked as one of the F-35 enterprise’s biggest headaches. The Government Accountability Office has repeatedly documented problems, such as a bulky “deployable” version of ALIS that cannot connect to the internet or incorrectly signaling to maintainers that a plane is not mission capable due to incorrect data.

“We need to continue to improve the functionality of ALIS in the near term, as we ensure that the ODIN structure that we put into place, from a hardware perspective, from a data environment perspective, and from a software perspective, is what the users need,” Fick told lawmakers during the hearing.

In late 2020, the program office developed an ODIN user agreement and capability needs statement, which lays out what tasks ODIN needs to be able to accomplish and how the system should function, he said.
A decade ago my td. "JSF,Turkey or Talisman" found huge debate both for and against. You can take you pick today. The IN won't touch it with a bargepole even if offered1 It comes with excess baggage and at massive cost,one F-35 equiv. to 3/4 times the cost of a 29K or even an improved NLCA. Furthermore,it won't fit into our lifts like the Rafale-M and SH,and the exhaust from its v.powerful engine is so hot,decks melt if not designed with the F-35B in mind!
darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4018
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by darshan »

chetak wrote: the sly cheeni had acquired immensely cheaply, three russki carriers to examine, poke around and to essentially gain design and construction insights that had taken the russkis many decades to perfect.

The cheeni thus had three fairly intact russki carriers and most of their machinery to study, inspect, dissect and copy and that is how they virtually refitted and rebuilt the varyag into the Liaoning. No design was sold to them. The hans however had three carriers to poke into and study at leisure which is better than having the plans.

Incidentally, when the varyag was still in a very good condition, she was offered to India as well as china and russia too but in India, the powers that be said no.

The cheenis and the russkis also said no but the cheeni were playing the long game.

The ukrainians simply abandoned the varyag and left her to rot while the cheenis waited patiently like vultures. Finally, after some years, they picked up the abandoned varyag at an auction where they had a shell company bid USD$20 million
One wonders why Ukraine didn't offer to US or why did US allow this buy. Nothing that US can't afford or sabotage. US did everything possible to prevent India from developing various technologies.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

chetak wrote:the sly cheeni had acquired immensely cheaply, three russki carriers to examine, poke around and to essentially gain design and construction insights that had taken the russkis many decades to perfect.
As Snaik also said,China spent billions (under the table deals) to acquire the tech from Russia and Ukraine it wasn’t simple reverse engineer it was noted hundreds of specialists from those countries were shipped in and out, you can say in a way those hulls were way to cover up the fact and people would assume it was reverse engineering it was in fact a mixture of both.

South Korea had scrapped Novorossiysk it is not like they are now able to float a Kiev class carrier now, carriers get scrapped by Asian countries quite a lot without the actual blueprint and technicians who worked on it you cannot do much with it.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

darshan wrote:One wonders why Ukraine didn't offer to US or why did US allow this buy. Nothing that US can't afford or sabotage. US did everything possible to prevent India from developing various technologies.
chetak wrote: the sly cheeni had acquired immensely cheaply, three russki carriers to examine, poke around and to essentially gain design and construction insights that had taken the russkis many decades to perfect.

No one realized at the time what the cheeni was up to.

there was no social media at the time, to disseminate info, air suspicions and get back instant responses and additional inputs from military analysts and interested cheeni watching people around the world

Hat tip. The hans played that one really well.

the real question is why we did not do such a thing.

many gurus on the forum could easily list chapter and verse, the list of golden opportunities that our khiladis let pass because some "director" or some "scientific advisor to god almighty himself" was stuck in the empire building mode while the vast majority of well content and happy subordinate crabs were sleeping off the previous night's revelries in the comfortable barrel full of other sleeping crabs
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by ldev »

chetak wrote:
darshan wrote:One wonders why Ukraine didn't offer to US or why did US allow this buy. Nothing that US can't afford or sabotage. US did everything possible to prevent India from developing various technologies.

No one realized at the time what the cheeni was up to.

there was no social media at the time, to disseminate info, air suspicions and get back instant responses and additional inputs from military analysts and interested cheeni watching people around the world

Hat tip. The hans played that one really well.

the real question is why we did not do such a thing.

many gurus on the forum could easily list chapter and verse, the list of golden opportunities that our khiladis let pass because some "director" or some "scientific advisor to god almighty himself" was stuck in the empire building mode while the vast majority of well content and happy subordinate crabs were sleeping off the previous night's revelries in the comfortable barrel full of other sleeping crabs
This happened in 1998. In the world of 1998 China was not even a blip on the radar for the US/West in terms of being a military threat, consider that during the Kosovo campaign in 1999 the USAF "accidentally" bombed the Chinese embassy. It had not even joined the World Trade Organization and was far from the economic giant it is today. Russia was under Yeltsin and the West had de-facto control via economic advice over the Russian Federation. Remember that Putin became President of Russia only in May 2000. Why would the US worry about the sale of a rusted out derelict carrier of the former USSR to China?
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

chetak wrote:No one realized at the time what the cheeni was up to.

there was no social media at the time, to disseminate info, air suspicions and get back instant responses and additional inputs from military analysts and interested cheeni watching people around the world
I would refute that I knew it was widely discussed about China AC ambitions even pre 00s. I believe even the transport of the vessel thru the straits was being blocked by western powers but enough $$ helped China get it thru.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

John wrote:
chetak wrote:the sly cheeni had acquired immensely cheaply, three russki carriers to examine, poke around and to essentially gain design and construction insights that had taken the russkis many decades to perfect.
As Snaik also said,China spent billions (under the table deals) to acquire the tech from Russia and Ukraine it wasn’t simple reverse engineer it was noted hundreds of specialists from those countries were shipped in and out, you can say in a way those hulls were way to cover up the fact and people would assume it was reverse engineering it was in fact a mixture of both.

South Korea had scrapped Novorossiysk it is not like they are now able to float a Kiev class carrier now, carriers get scrapped by Asian countries quite a lot without the actual blueprint and technicians who worked on it you cannot do much with it.

There was little reverse engg if at all. If they had built a new carrier, then it would have been a very different ball game.

They did a massive "refit" on the varyag that was not economically sensible but given the position that they were in at the time, it made eminent sense militarily as also in their supreme national interest.

The next carriers that the hans are building will show the results of the expertise gained, lessons learned and design insights assimilated that would have led to refining their own designs and architecture. It will still be based to a very large extent on the previous russki carriers.

The russkis are the best mechanical engineers in the entire world. Many designs of theirs are pathbreaking and extremely innovative. Even the amerikis, germans or the japs cannot compete with them. And the very best among the russki mechanical engineers are the russki jews, many of whom have migrated to israel today but many of them still remain in russia and are very comfortably employed there.

Russki ships have a large commonality in machinery. Different classes of ships or aircraft or tanks will, very often and as applicable, simply reuse the very same proven equipment and well-understood technology.

they do not go about reinventing the wheel every time, unlike the goras of the west.

A small three rubber-bladed fan that is seen very commonly in aircraft cockpits to keep the pilots comfortable is reused in everything from submarines to warships, merchant ships, to spacecraft to trucks. There is no parallel to this on western platforms

The russkis follow the same policy with instruments, sensors, gauges, pencils, spoons, forks, and plates too or anything else you care to name. So, literally, the cheeni had got themselves a huge store house full of usable spares and all for free.

The cheeni had themselves three carriers full of such equipment to overhaul or reuse with enough spares available from cannibalization of similar equipment to sustain them for some time. The hulls were admittedly in bad shape but the russki machinery, in such cases, is very often extremely well packed in preservative grease, and can be safely stored for many years.

Yes, they would have bribed the shipyard staff to leave almost all of the carrier's equipment in place and that would have meant huge bribery at the director of the shipyard level. The weapons and electronics would have all been removed anyway for use elsewhere so the higher ups would not have been too bothered about equipment as they would have got their cuts directly from the cheeni

The liaoning is today still sailing on soviet era boilers and steam turbine engines which should all have been ripped out before the sale.

Normally, most of the ship's machinery is removed before any ship is scrapped and sold for its metal value. In the case of russki ships, their metal has almost nil commercial value.

In India, people are very keen to buy scrapped western ships but there will be no commercial interest in a scrapped russki hull. That's why the IN uses scrapped russki ships for missile target practice.

BTW, the entire cheeni flight ops teams and their carrier air ops procedures were trained and set up by the russkis. No great insight here. The hans may have got to the stage where they may have started to adapt some of the procedures to suit cheeni operational doctrines which is still evolving.

what stopped us from doing a similar thing, like getting retired russki specialists on payment to help us resolve many outstanding issues. Did we not have the testimonials or was it the empire building crab mentality that we so often and so easily explained away in dharmic terms.......
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by John »

chetak wrote:what stopped us from doing a similar thing, like getting retired russki specialists on payment to help us resolve many outstanding issues. Did we not have the testimonials or was it the empire building crab mentality that we so often and so easily explained away in dharmic terms.......
We won’t because we want to appease the Russians, we would pay Russia gov money to get them to send specialists to work on it rather than go behind them. Heck we won’t even reverse engineer any russian tech without paying Russia $$.

In other cases of tech Chinese for example simply went around Russia defense companies and behind the table struck deal with corrupt Officials (goes all the way up to Putin IMO) to get S-300 tech for example (don’t worry same thing will happen with S-400s which will be rolling out of Chinese factories before we even induct ours).

Our media would have field day if we try to do anything like that even if Putin gives his blessing.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

When the USSR collapsed the Chins were first off the block vacuuming up Ru scientists to help modernise their milware and support Sov. era weaponry. A v. smart move because they think decades ahead and have a goal,whereas our MOD babus push papers, keep the military out from key decisions.

A former chief told me that when he commanded a flotilla to an African country on a friendly visit, the pres. was so impressed with the professionalism of the IN that he wanted the IN to plan and supply his future naval requirements and train his navy.There was also a great possibility of the IN securing a naval base there too. The request was immediately informed to the MOD/ govt. upon his return. What happened? It took 2 years for the MOD to approve two economy class tickets for two naval officers to visit that country! The opportunity was lost. Who are sniffing around there today? The Chins. One person who took swift decisions on milware and defence matters was the late RG, perhaps because he was a pilot and understood military tech. much better than your average politico.A pity MP is no longer with us. A huge loss.

It's not that we've not had large interaction,cooperation with Ru experts but on a G-2-G basis for BMos,SSBNs,missiles,etc. But not openly known if we hired Ru scientists privately like the Chins.

Reverse engineering foreign milware without paying a price,the Chin cheating way results in that country getting only second level inferior " export" systems. China has never got the top line variants of anything sold to them by Russia after they started cheating. Their aircraft,etc. may look like Ru clones,but are much below in capability,not upto what we've been given like MKIs,etc. Even their S-400s are reported to have inferior capability to that we're getting. And there's nothing wrong in paying a price for what you obtain from abroad,whether its Ru or western.Look at the huge price of anything French! Even the Croats are paying around $100M a pop for second hand Rafales!

One interesting stat I observed in the 6 extra Kalibir class Kilo 636.3s that the Ru Pacific fleet is getting. One sub launched in less than 2 years! That must be the fastest sub-building programme around. The cost too just around $350M a pop.
The Kalibir/ Klub family of missiles from land attack,anti-ship and anti-sub variants, has no equiv. in any western sub arsenal,not even the US which however has Tomahawk, equipped aboard former SSBNs in massive number that have pounded targets all over the ME. Why the IN needs SSGNs like the Akulas apart from the 6 SSNs which being smaller would have lesser weaponry aboard. Some of the SSNs woulc be on patrol protecting our SSBNs and part of a CBG task force.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

John wrote:
chetak wrote:what stopped us from doing a similar thing, like getting retired russki specialists on payment to help us resolve many outstanding issues. Did we not have the testimonials or was it the empire building crab mentality that we so often and so easily explained away in dharmic terms.......
We won’t because we want to appease the Russians, we would pay Russia gov money to get them to send specialists to work on it rather than go behind them. Heck we won’t even reverse engineer any russian tech without paying Russia $$.

In other cases of tech Chinese for example simply went around Russia defense companies and behind the table struck deal with corrupt Officials (goes all the way up to Putin IMO) to get S-300 tech for example (don’t worry same thing will happen with S-400s which will be rolling out of Chinese factories before we even induct ours).

Our media would have field day if we try to do anything like that even if Putin gives his blessing.
so, as per you, India's supreme national interests and her quest for a sustainable MIC should be mortgaged to some presstitutes and under lien to the BIF controlled media who will arbitrate on how, when, and with what India will fight her wars.

Isn't this exactly why India's urgent bofors replacement mission took such a torturous, twisted, corrupted, demented, delayed, and obstructive path because everyone and his brother in law paid off the media to slant their propaganda and malevolently delay the acquisition under any pretext, to the sole benefit of the paki-cheeni combo, not to mention the cut money.

In which other country does the equivalent of the BIF media have a decisive say in the defence procurement plans and processes, barring corruption issues.

many others have also spent years watching, assessing, understanding, and being disillusioned by the current state of affairs.

The media, per se, is the least of the problems.

The solution lies in exercising hard headed options, and certainly not in wishy washy hand wringing that has perpetuated the problem long enough by spinelessly sweeping it under the carpet.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chola »

I posed the Varyag question before. India was offered the hulk first by Ukraine. Before Cheen.

So it always felt a great missed opportunity to me as it would have enhanced ours and delayed Cheen's carrier program in one stroke. Austin ji and other did provide answers that assuaged this feeling though.

Money of course was one reason but the major one was the lack of a drydock or even a proper berth then to do anything with a 65K ton hull.

As noted in the posts above, Cheen had the opportunity to study two Minsk class (and a western carrier, HMS Melbourne) before attempting the restoration of the Varyag. It still took them a decade (2002 - 2012) to get the thing ready. A very long time especially when you consider the speed of their construction of Type 002 and 003 carriers. They did get rid of the giant anti-ship launchers to expand the hangar. Those silos went through several decks so removing them might have compromised structural integrity that they had to deal with.

I read that the propulsion system though the engines were preserved in packing grease still had many issues. The cheenis had to replace much of that labyrinth of rusting pipes that they were only able to things running in 2011 and they still had a steam burst that left the thing dead in water during sea trials in 2012.

So with that in mind and knowing the lack of a dock to properly refit this monster then, there was little chance India would have thought it could have done much with it. Back in 2000 no one would have thought the chinis were embarking on a carrier program and spent funds even $20M in slowing them down.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32224
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chetak »

When India was offered the varyag by Ukraine, she was in very good condition. Though she was not operational, she was far from being the hulk that she later became when neglect and disinterest allowed her condition to deteriorate.

we missed a very great opportunity by pissing off ukraine and keeping her out of arms sales business to India at the urgent insistence of the russkis.

even now, if fences can be reliably mended, dealing with Ukraine may be well worth our while. But the russkis would be mightily pissed off as would the hans and the pakis.

they have expertise in naval and aviation platforms and and build great tanks too which the pakis have purchased.

and they make very fine aero engines too
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5136
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by chola »

chetak wrote:When India was offered the varyag by Ukraine, she was in very good condition. Though she was not operational, she was far from being the hulk that she later became when neglect and disinterest allowed her condition to deteriorate.

we missed a very great opportunity by pissing off ukraine and keeping her out of arms sales business to India at the urgent insistence of the russkis.

even now, if fences can be reliably mended, dealing with Ukraine may be well worth our while. But the russkis would be mightily pissed off as would the hans and the pakis.

they have expertise in naval and aviation platforms and and build great tanks too which the pakis have purchased.
Don't forget the engines to our Talwars. Or the An-32s. Ukraine was and still is massively useful. Definitely much missed opportunity there, especially since it had been in financial crisis (albeit created by Russian policies) where it was seeking partners everywhere. Again, our relations with Russia probably affected what we could do openly.

China had a similar relationship with Rus but they got Ukraine to practically build the chini carrier program. Remember, they sold cheen the T-10K SU-33 prototype that formed the base of the J-15. Whatever the issues with the J-15, the chinis would not have an aircraft to fly off the Liaoning without it. They might still be waiting for a domestic naval fighter today or tried to get 29K where we would have had leverage.

The T-10K and Varyag were part and parcel of the PLAN's entire program.

If we had the money and infrastructure this would had been ours and the chinis might have had to wait several decades more for carrier and aircraft. We might have continued to lead Asia in carriers today.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by mody »

The russkies can play the paki card and prevent us from working with Ukraine and we can do likewise. For some of the items though, cracks are emerging. Russia sold Kornet-E and Mi-35 helis to the pakis and we bought semi-cryogenic engine design from Ukraine.

Given the Gorki experience, refurbishing the Varyag and getting is operational would have been huge task and very expensive. Most likely more expensive as compared to what the Russians charged us for the Gorki. The Chinis would have certainly hired a lot of Ukrainian engineers along with the Varyag and all its blueprints to get the thing up and sailing.

Building a follow on to the Vikrant class would actually be really prudent. A slightly enlarged Vikrant class vessel at 50K tons, would be ideal. Or else go with a 65K ton nuclear powered beast.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by kit »

John wrote:
chetak wrote:what stopped us from doing a similar thing, like getting retired russki specialists on payment to help us resolve many outstanding issues. Did we not have the testimonials or was it the empire building crab mentality that we so often and so easily explained away in dharmic terms.......
We won’t because we want to appease the Russians, we would pay Russia gov money to get them to send specialists to work on it rather than go behind them. Heck we won’t even reverse engineer any russian tech without paying Russia $$.
A good idea would be to study the origins of Indias IGMDP !
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Navy News & Discussion - 12 April 2021

Post by Philip »

Some interesting details about the DRDO's v.innovative SMART ASW missile system.

https://frontierindia.com/drdo-smart-is ... -concepts/

According to the report,the SMART supersonic missile delivery system ,carries an LWT torpedo out to a range of 650KM. That's huge, more than the 250KM range of the RU Metel, a proposal in the 1990s and the 40KM ASROC now discarded by the USN.Plus its speed,supersonic,to deliver the LWT in the fastest possible time to the last known coordinates of the sub allowing the lesser endurance of the LWT to make its search. Supposed to be fired from mobile (lorry) shore batteries and warships. If the SMART system can fit into our UVLMs, meant for BMos, a 16 round launcher complex could carry say 4-8 SMART systems too which would be much beyond the range of an integral heavy ASW helo carrying an LWT. Of course detecting and targeting the enemy sub at such ranges is going to be another task altogether! One way in which this could be done is from UW SOSUS- like systems,or UUVs, in swarms say monitoring the IOR chokepoints like the Malacca Straits, sending data to let's say the ANC Command via sat,which would then activate its land-based batteries or flash the info/coordinates to IN warships within range. Whether any course correction is also possible during its transit to the target is a moot point.
Post Reply