Indian Naval Discussion

[Rahul M]

chacko, are you sure it will be called the kolkata class ? 15B is quite different from 15A after all.

So far its K class. haven't heard a new name for that. If you read what I wrote, the deck is different. Weapons will be of what it will be available at that time. Rest characteristics remain same.

thanks, usually navy naming convention names a class after the leadship and till that one is named the project number is used. I guess we will just have to wait.

even our chinese drones manage for meaningful flames.

Sigh. Its my opinion that this project is drawing resources that could be better used, into an unnecessary vortex. {what resources ? we spend dozens of billions of $ buying barely modern arms from abroad which don't work half as good as advertised and we balk at allocating a few million $ that could well alleviate our dependence on ridiculously expensive foreign items ? }My two cents? Dump this silly project, and concentrate on better engine tech for surface ships so we dont need to buy from Zorya, GE, & Co. {that's like saying accountants should dump their accounting duties and start writing codes ! entirely different groups of people with different skillsets are involved in those two projects. how do you know the project is silly or otherwise without conducting a technical audit on it ? there is little enough facts in public domain to say either way !!} Worry about missile tech for the Navy. Worry about developing SAM systems. Radars. Sonars. {why not let the navy decide that ? surely they know better than you and me ?}

DRDO is not a holy cow (though some treat it so, here), far from it. {please, creating strawmen doesn't help this discussion in any way} Their blunders are sufficiently public that they cannot be wished away. {blunders, which curiously enough are 'reported'/invented by the same group of journalists that write of the army as a bunch of corrupt potbellied cut purses, views that we are aware that you do not subscribe to. why are you then so eager to believe what these disgraced people have to say on DRDO ? if you believe one you must believe the other.
given the funds allocated and the restrictions they have worked under, DRDO, at least in the last 2 decades has been a certain success.}
Saying something about it does NOT constitute a flame. {it does when it is meant as one. I don't think even the most rabid DRDO basher would take that one liner to be a constructive criticism}

BTW, Kolkata class have nary a thing to do with DRDO, and are successfully produced simply because DRDO involvement is kept to a minimum, and most of the work is done by the service itself.

oh really ?
let's see
main weapon system : (brahmos) CHECK
main air-defence system : (LRSAM JV with IAI) CHECK
main SONAR : HUMSA-NG CHECK
towed SONAR : NAGIN CHECK
electronic support measures : ellora or an advanced derivative CHECK
electronic counter measure : ajanta or an advanced derivative CHECK
combat management system : BEL EMCCA CHECK
torpedoes : NSTL torpedoes at the time of commissioning CHECK
and if memory serves right DMRL developed steel has gone into the class as well.

for someone of your seniority, it really surprises me that you are commenting so authoritatively on it when your awareness of the actual project would be called scratchy at best.

-----------------
andy sahab, all iterative changes (as IN projects usually go) but taking all into account the difference will be significant. for one, the electronics would be a gen newer, CIWS might be changed/updated. and we might see brahmos-2 ?

[D Roy]

and by the way,

the AIP project has been mentioned in the MOD annual report itself. There's nothing hush hush about it.

It is a clear navy requirement and is being very seriously developed.

.

[krisna]

Largest Indo-French Naval Exercise Yet From Tomorrow

Exercise Varuna 2011, starting tomorrow in the Arabian Sea off Goa, is a major part of the French Navy's Agapanthe 2010 deployment. This bilateral exercise will involve nine ships, including two aircraft carriers: INS Viraat (with Sea Harriers and Seaking) and FS Charles De Gaulle (strike group composed of E2C, Rafale and SEM).

The 7 other units are the following: Indian frigates INS Godavari and INS Ganga, Class-209 submarine INS Shalki, French destroyers FS Forbin and FS Tourville, fleet tanker FS Meuse and nuclear submarine FS Améthyste. Shorebased maritime patrol aircraft will also participate in the exercise.

Exercise Varuna will start with a harbour phase in Mormugao (7-10 January), followed by a phase at sea (11-14 January). The phase off Goa includes air operations, submarine exercises, surface exercises as well as replenishment at sea.

[Karan M]

Rahul M, to add to your post.
From what I can discern, the Ellora has both ESM & ECM functions, in other words, a complete EW suite, and is the follow on to Ajanta. I base this on news reports which mention both signal interception and jamming capability, plus the latest ships all have Ellora but not Ajanta.

Also, the Navy is actively seeking the DRDO's help for is signature reduction and material development. Both of these are areas where the Navy has limited capability, and the defence research naval labs have already delivered kits for reducing signature (sound, radar etc) and are expanding capabilities to meet naval needs. In terms of materials, there is DMR49 steel and others are also reportedly in development. These replaced raw materials previously imported from Russia and other countries.

These have been reported by news outlets & the Indian Navy website has details on the DMR steel effort.
----------
Now the revised claim is made that the DRDO consumes a lot of national R&D resources, and that is also rhetoric, I think. The question that should actually be asked is whether the GOI's remaining allocation for other research has resulted in at least as many products the allocation to defence research has. And whether allocation for research, overall is even good enough for Indian needs, whether they be defence or civilian. In the 8 years of the current administration, we have seen a cynical attempt to use the exchequer to guarantee votes by launching so many schemes named after dynastic leaders, on the grounds of giving employment and social justice. What was the cumulative cost to exchequer & second, were these even effective and did they reach the intended recipients. I am afraid, that the 2G scam is probably the tip of the iceberg when one considers how much money has been squandered on such attempts as versus investing for posterity, whether it be vocational training, education, healthcare/education and even advanced functions like research.

Coming back to research, Wiki has a lot of info on orders placed & they are substantial. I don't recall the exact percentages but half of defense PSU BEL's orderbook is from products developed with DRDO, though it could be found if required. Also, Ordnance Board has got a lot of business via defence research work also. Basically, almost most of the success India has had in indigenization has been from defence research. In contrast, the fetish for license production while it has given us the ability to support imported products, has not done much for overall localization of arms production. India does not break IPR like China does either.

[ASPuar]

WHAT?? There are DRDO made systems on board Kolkata?? NO! It cant be! I had no idea. In fact, I thought APSOH was a Tibetan dog, Nagin was a bad 1980s movie, and BRAHMOS was a the latest "macchar maar" cream! Damn my scratchy knowledge! (This sounds like a good line to use in a anti-ringworm cream commercial).

Oh for goodness sakes.

I made a comment, based on an opinion of mine. It elicited a reaction. I discussed the matter with someone who seems to know more about it than I (reference Chackojoseph). Result? I learned something, and Im probably getting a tub of mithai. All to the good. The matter ended.

So now someone is going to list a bunch of component systems designed by DRDO, and try to 'inform' me that these are on board the Kolkata class? Of course they are! But that doesnt mean that the ship wasnt designed, and put together through the efforts of some very dedicated personnel in the DND.

But the somewhat hyperbolic and soul searing, and frankly reactions of some over here, are getting a bit tiresome...

How about a little civility please? No doubt my knowledge is "scratchy". But Im not belittling anyone on this forum, whatever my opinions might be, and whatever theirs might be. Im quite willing to learn without being addressed in this fashion. To LEARN, gentlemen. That is the point of BR, I think.

Naval R&D is a relative "success" as far as Indias indigenous effort is concerned. I think it is largely because of a mitigation of the many of the issues that plague the DRDOs relationship with other services. Why not try and move best practices across the board, and eliminate the worst ones! My opinion doesnt matter, but I have, as I have said all along, a lot of respect for the best of the DRDO scientists. Do not misread me. I want that same thing as (most) of you. A strong, confident, and SUCCESSFUL MIC!

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

@KaranM: You raise an excellent point. What sort of return does the rest of our research money provide? I too, would be interested to know.

[Rahul M]

ASP sahab, how about a little civility when commenting about the folk who work at DRDO as well ? they are human beings too, if lesser ones in your eyes. what would your reaction be if someone made similar comments about, say, the army ? just as you think your biting comments on DRDO are more than justified, so do many people think similar digs against the forces are justified.

I'm simply sick and tired of people on both sides of this ridiculous divide score self goal after self goal in petty squabbles trying to earn brownie points for their 'side'. it has to stop. period.

p.s. when on earth did I say DRDO deserves all the credit for P15A ? you claimed "Kolkata class have nary a thing to do with DRDO". I just mentioned some of the DRDO input to the program. if you claim you said so after being aware of the considerable DRDO contribution, I don't know what conclusion to draw other than you are being quite liberal with facts when it comes to defence R&D in India.

of course, as mentioned many times constructive criticism is necessary and welcome, cheap digs are not. in this light it is not hard to see why your first post in this series created a problem.

[ASPuar]

Damn it, Id rewritten my above post masterfully moments ago, and then the server crapped out. Now theres no point doing it again.

RMji, I was referring to the conceptualization and actualization of the actual ship, so you cannot accuse me of having any 'attitude' towards DRDO. And while I appreciate your role as defender of the dignity of DRDO against my alleged well planned assaults, please realise that I am also very proud of the men and women of DRDO, and I certainly dont think of them as lesser human beings, children of a lesser god, or any other such cliche. I simply dont take everything they say at face value, because, like all people, they are, in some cases, fallible.

And what abuse have I heaped upon them, sir, that we must all collectively wring our hands in anguish, and chew upon our collars? None at all. I have simply said, that I hope that they are concentrating on the work at hand as well, before moving on to new projects? Call that abuse? Ive heard worse from my own boss! Hypersensitivity seems to be at work. CJ, on the other hand, provided a fairly good response to what I said.

As to the second matter, you must take things in context. To list a few components and say that "There, DRDO has lots to do with this ship", is a bit silly. I mean sure DRDO has lots to do with many things that went into the ship. But I was talking about the concept and building of the ship, which was what the article posted to me by ChackoJoseph was about! By this coin, next, Russia will phone up and list every piece of eqpt they installed, and claim it is a Russian vessel?

BTW, youre either up late, RMji, or you operate in a different timezone from self. Insomnia is a terrible thing.

[ASPuar]

Added later:

RM, I couldnt resist editing my earlier post! The first version was too grave, angsty, and pompous. I like the present version better. I hope you do too!

[Karan M]

But are you trying to tell me that the Kolkata project happened only because of DRDO, simply because certain component systems were designed by it? I would imagine that even the most disingenous would give SOME credit to the DND for the Kolkata class. I mean, by gosh, they did conceptualize, and actualize it, after all.

I am unsure whom you are responding to, is it me or Rahulm, eitherways:

But isnt above statement a contradiction of what you originally said?

BTW, Kolkata class have nary a thing to do with DRDO, and are successfully produced simply because DRDO involvement is kept to a minimum, and most of the work is done by the service itself.

Clearly, this is not true - the primary sensors and armament of the ship are coming from DRDO - that is not keeping DRDO involvement to a minimum.

Most of the work is not done by the service itself either. It is done by a mix of public sector units, shipyards (including design work assistance) plus private firms which also contribute. The DND does a lot of the initial draft work & design work, but the construction and finish & in progress revisions, fitting out - all that have contribution from many companies, domestic & foreign.

In the final calculus, I will say it again: The nation has a right to expect that the money it spends on defence research yields the desired result. In some areas it is doing so. In other areas it fails to repay investment. Should we not ask why? Should we further, not try and answer that question, and address any issues that are identified? And its quite clear from CAG reports, that failures do occur, and there are definite reasons for them, which are avoidable (of course, some of the ghazis on here will declare that CAG also doesnt know anything, and we may as well give up, because DRDOs word is gospel).

But where is the person who claimed that the nation does not have the right to expect the research it invests in? And who claimed that it is perfect? And who claimed that issues which are identified should not be addressed?

These are all of your own invention.

Now, lets come to the CAG - of course, failures do occur & sometimes the CAG is correct. But again, the CAG is equally if not more critical of the defence services! And nor is it perfect.

If the CAG is indeed correct, what do you make of this?
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2008/03/ ... kshak.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 844408.cms
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2007/05/ ... needs.html

BTW, you use the term ghazis Again, this is dubious use of rhetoric & does not contribute to conducting a collegial conversation, something which you note should be done.

To compare, in the defence corruption discussion, arent you the resident ghazi noting that how the corrupt civilian establishment is to be held accountable whilst engaging in spirited discourse defending the army?

Naval R&D is a relative "success" as far as Indias indigenous effort is concerned. I think it is largely because of a mitigation of the many of the issues that plague the DRDOs relationship with other services. Why not try and move best practices across the board, and eliminate the worst ones! My opinion doesnt matter, but I have, as I have said all along, a lot of respect for the best of the DRDO scientists. Do not misread me. I want that same thing as (most) of you.

Fine, but this is not what your initial claims were. They were full of insulting rhetoric. And that does not make a convincing argument.

@KaranM: You raise an excellent point. What sort of return does the rest of our research money provide? I too, would be interested to know.

The details are available from reply in Parliament by Defence Minister in December 2010:

Question:
(a) the salient achievements made by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) in civil and military research during the last five years;

(a) Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is primarily engaged in design and development of strategic, complex and security sensitive systems for our Armed Forces. It has developed a number of systems during the last five years. These include missiles; unmanned aerial vehicles; radars; electronic warfare systems; sonars; torpedos; combat vehicles; bridging systems; combat aircraft; infrared seeker; sensors; NBC decontamination suites; parachutes; propellants and explosives; detonators; composite materials; fuel cells; paints; antennas; communication systems; etc. A large number of DRDO developed systems have been productionised and inducted into Services and many are in the induction stage. The value of these systems comes to about Rs. 1,00,000 Cr.

[Karan M]

I'm simply sick and tired of people on both sides of this ridiculous divide score self goal after self goal in petty squabbles trying to earn brownie points for their 'side'. it has to stop. period.

Well said.

Either it is Army corrupt OR civilians incompetent. Thats just avoids a serious look at the systemic issues affecting Indian defence affairs.

[ASPuar]

Karan, I am not interested in continued acrimony. I initially was responding to ChackoJoseph, and later to RM. I am sure you are quite correct in everything you are saying, but frankly, I am not interested in petty arguments on the topic. If you would like for me to produce more CAG reports for you, showing the contrary of what you are, I wont do it. You already know where to find them and read them. Toodles.

[Karan M]

please realise that I am also very proud of the men and women of DRDO, and I certainly dont think of them as lesser human beings, children of a lesser god, or any other such cliche.

I have great respect for our defence scientists, but modesty, focus, and a fair assessment of their own capabilities, are not amongst their many good qualities.

It would be equally insulting if:

I have great respect for our defence services, but modesty, focus, and a fair assessment of their own capabilities, are not amongst their many good qualities.

Also:

BTW, Kolkata class have nary a thing to do with DRDO, and are successfully produced simply because DRDO involvement is kept to a minimum

It would be equally insulting if:

BTW, Arjun tank have nary a thing to do with Army, and are successfully produced simply because Army involvement is kept to a minimum

Also:

DRDO is not a holy cow (though some treat it so, here), far from it. Their blunders are sufficiently public that they cannot be wished away.

And:

Army is not a holy cow (though some treat it so, here), far from it. Their blunders are sufficiently public that they cannot be wished away.

...

ChackoJosephji, you are correct, unlike you, I am not so close to the DRDO lobby, and so do not have access to behind the scenes photo ops organised by them.

changed to:

you are correct, unlike you, I am not so close to the Army lobby, and so do not have access to behind the scenes photo ops organised by them.

Just a few examples..

Simply ----> far too much rhetoric. The same comments employed against the defense forces would be equally rhetorical and insulting.

[ASPuar]

^^

Im a bit confused about what your point is. I do not represent the services, so there is no need to imagine that your awkward distortions of sentences above will leave me clutching my forehead, and stewing in remorse and anguish about what you have said. Your assertions above may be an interesting philosophical exercise, and possibly excellent sentence writing practice for the SAT's, but of no interest to me.

Furthermore, you didnt involve yourself when the matter was actually being discussed with CJ, so I was not addressing you, nor discussing any of these issues with you at any point. Sure, if you see something I said, and want to comment upon it, go ahead. But If you wish to join issue, please do so in a timely manner, and without the use of obvious flame-bait tactics like the ones seen supra. When the issue is finished, not much point raking it up again, especially since Rahul IS saying that this discussion is undesirable. By planting this excellent post above, youre possibly hoping that Ill leap right back in, but Im not about to, sorry.

Amusingly, the "equally insultings" which you have laid out, have been said by many posters here about the armed forces without any prompting. Possibly they have some reasons for saying so.

What I said had to do with the DRDO. And I think all points have already been answered, without your sterling additions.

Finally, as to your points about what I said directly to ChackoJoseph, what I have addressed to another poster, and discussed with him, is none of your business. If he is ok with it, and I am ok with it, then do not try to fire your barbs from the shoulder of another. There is a perfectly good complaint button provided by BR, and if CJ had a problem with what I said, he could have pressed it, and demanded redress without the intervention of your good offices, thanks very much. Or he could have just chewed me out publicly.

For the last three posts, I have tried to say that I consider the matter closed. Im sorry, but now, youre just trying to cause a problem.

[Karan M]

Karan, I am not interested in continued acrimony. I initially was responding to ChackoJoseph, and later to RM. I am sure you are quite correct in everything you are saying, but frankly, I am not interested in petty arguments on the topic. If you would like for me to produce more CAG reports for you, showing the contrary of what you are, I wont do it. You already know where to find them and read them. Toodles.

ASPuar,
Lets be clear, this is not about a petty argument. This is (or rather was) about your use of rhetoric in a discussion which would be better off with more facts & less rhetoric. I don't really care about whether you produce more CAG reports "showing the contrary of what I am" - whatever that is supposed to mean, given the fact the CAG has skewered (to put it mildly) the army which you support with such passion, all the while running down the civilian side of things. All I am saying is that a bit more balance would be a good thing to expect in your mails, versus partisanship, from a person of your caliber.

The correct approach to take would be to admit that the CAG which you are so using (as a crutch in this case) is not necessarily always correct, whether it be about the Army or the civilian R&D establishment. And nor is the Army or the civilian establishment lily white either, but they do try to do their bit. Do go through the links I provided & then consider what the CAG has said.

Perhaps it has not struck you, but the irony is that in your eagerness to pursue your cause, you are actually running down the few partners the Indian Army actually has. The rest of the world looks upon it as a cash cow (for purchasing arms), while the average civilian is least bothered about the army unless its wartime (whereupon patriotic juices flow), or after the recent scams is busy attempting to draw parallels.

You can continue with your finger pointing if you wish, but the facts don't bear them out.

The Rs 100,000 Crore figure contradicts your assertions that results so far are dismal. Let me explain. Even if we take the corresponding R&D budget for the past five years at an average of Rs 8500 Crore (2009 original allocation & actually higher than the real numbers for previous years), we see a production value of 2 times the amount spent in research. This when I am deliberately overstating the R&D budget (and which has been higher over the past five years than in the past). Anyways, you asked for details, these are now available, so you can make of them what you will.

PS: In response to your second reply - I am just laying out the cards as I see them. Your claims that you were replying to RahulM & Chacko & hence my replies were unnecessary are not germane. This is a discussion forum and not a private email exchange, is it not. Your statements to Chacko, being addressed to him apart, attempted to imply that there was a lobby at play. That is germane & if the same claim was made of the Defence services, it would be equally wrong.

Second, I am not "causing a problem" - my point is clear. I was showing how your use of rhetoric was unproductive and did not "contribute to a collegial atmosphere", something you claimed was lacking thanks to those replying to you. Whilst, all the while, you were ignoring your own barbs & liberal use of adjectives. Nor do I find your use of words like ghazi particularly endearing.

Third, your claims that I am flame baiting by using the crutch of a timely reply, is fairly wrong - see the time stamps & when I replied.

ASPuar, so far, I have endeavoured not to use the same level of rhetoric you so gainfully employ with such abandon. Including this rather trite bit as seen here:

I do not represent the services, so there is no need to imagine that your awkward distortions of sentences above will leave me clutching my forehead, and stewing in remorse and anguish about what you have said. Your assertions above may be an interesting philosophical exercise, and possibly excellent sentence writing practice for the SAT's, but of no interest to me.

Unfortunately, I am unable to demonstrate my appreciation at your command over the english language & how masterfully you use "toodles" & how much you scored in the SAT's. On the contrary, my focus was on the assumption that we were having a discussion about your rhetoric & whether the claims you raised were correct.

I was merely showing how nicely your statements dovetailed with those of whom you would decry as having insulted the Army if a few words were merely exchanged. I think it makes the point fairly well about how partisan your statements were in this instance, but you can disagree.

Lastly, I replied to you as I do follow & respect what you write. If it were a troll, I would not bother.

Yes, the matter is closed from my end as well, as long as hopefully you don't respond with even more rhetoric. Reading large blocks of text, with so much Wren & Martin is a bit too much for my disadvantaged mind which has to struggle with composing replies in lucid english..

[vasu_ray]

Unmanned Dhruv

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... dhruv.html

hopefully they add AEW radar panels alongside the Dhruv's tail boom for surveillance missions

[Karan M]

Wow. The Dhruv will have more payload & endurance than a Chetak for sure, especially if they put that fuel tanks in the additional space used for troops etc towards the rear.

[Rupak]

Gentlemen
Enough please with the arguments and acrimony. This is a good thread with lots of good info and dicussion. I would request people to please self delete stuff which is not relevant.
thanks
R

[Khalsa]

Did anyone know if this ?
This is news to me .... The news makes the CAPs looks rather aggressive.

Hmmm....

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/07/04/st ... 221200.htm

[Singha]

just mental masturbation by the french. imagining they have a 'global role' to play...if India had decided to send a squadron of fighters to breach the paki airspace they'd have done the sensible thing and sailed away as fast as their engines could take them

[chackojoseph]

ASPuar,

Finally, as to your points about what I said directly to ChackoJoseph, what I have addressed to another poster, and discussed with him, is none of your business. If he is ok with it, and I am ok with it, then do not try to fire your barbs from the shoulder of another. There is a perfectly good complaint button provided by BR, and if CJ had a problem with what I said, he could have pressed it, and demanded redress without the intervention of your good offices, thanks very much. Or he could have just chewed me out publicly.

I turned a blind eye because I have got used to such things. But, I do pursue sometimes if its very persistent. While I have no ill feelings towards you, please don't put down Karan M citing me. It is not just because he is right. It is because I have a history with him. We had an issue where he was gracious enough to back down when he saw things were not as he saw. It is not just forum etiquette, its a general appreciable etiquette. I respect your POV and past history between you and me. Just that you have left me no choice but to do it. OT.

AIP

I have been thinking about my response in the AIP issue. I will try to put that in different words. DRDO is talking about making a Land based prototype. They are not talking about a proof of concept. The proof of concept stage is over and DRDO and IN have decided to take it to next stage. The land based prototype will be akin to the nuclear propulsion prototype at Kalpakam. The AI propulsion will go through simulation and the crew will be trained to handle it. DRDO cannot just shove it into a deployed submarine because submarines are scarce in IN right now. I hope that is clear.

Warship building

Now days, we give "job works" to western and other shipyards. It speaks volumes. Within India, entire design, material, processes like welding (NMRL is some innovations here too), sensors etc has been indigenous. There are few systems which are not viable for development in India, are being imported. Three main areas of imports are 1) propulsion : LM engines are now license produced in India. 2) Weapon systems : Lot of them imported and license produced 3) Sensors : Some are imported.

As someone already said it, DRDO's role , especially NMRL, NPOL etc have been vital. it includes materials, processes, stealth, techniques etc. A lot of things like the time spent on processes of shipbuilding has been contributed by DRDO.

If you think, you can make it to Mumbai, I will ask permission from DRDO for a joint visit to NMRL to make you understand. This offer is only for you.

[Indranil]

This offer is only for you.

Damn you Chacko Sahab . Next time I will pick up a "fight" with you. Let me decide first what I would like to see

[chackojoseph]

This offer is only for you.

Damn you Chacko Sahab . Next time I will pick up a "fight" with you. Let me decide first what I would like to see

You want to go to NMRL? See if you genuinely want to be there and agree on time (DRDO time), I will take you there. Let me know if any of you guys can make it to NMRL, I can ask for a group permission. IMO DRDO should be happy that folks are interested to see it. I wouldn't be interested to go out of Mumbai or Pune right now. Anything within Mumbai or Pune is ok.

[pralay]

You want to go to NMRL? See if you genuinely want to be there and agree on time (DRDO time), I will take you there. Let me know if any of you guys can make it to NMRL, I can ask for a group permission. IMO DRDO should be happy that folks are interested to see it. I wouldn't be interested to go out of Mumbai or Pune right now. Anything within Mumbai or Pune is ok.

i am in saar
what time and date

[Indranil]

Self Deleted: Redundant, after Chacko sahab's post.

[chackojoseph]

My mail @ frontierindia at g mail dot com. Others who want to go can write. If I know the numbers, I can tell DRDO.

Please delete your above post.

[Indranil]

Thank you Chacko sahab. You will hear from me before I come. Thanks a lot for the opportunity.

[shiv]

just mental masturbation by the french. imagining they have a 'global role' to play...if India had decided to send a squadron of fighters to breach the paki airspace they'd have done the sensible thing and sailed away as fast as their engines could take them

GD I agree with you. the news item suggests that the presence of French fighters somehow prevented India from doing things that they "would have done" if the French were not there.

On the same token I could say that the USA and NATO were thwarted from totally destroying the Taliban at 9-07 AM yesterday because of my going to the toilet at that very moment and was not present to guide them . The cause and effect relationship is clear to see in both instances.

[Khalsa]

Did anyone know if this ?
This is news to me .... The news makes the CAPs looks rather aggressive.

Hmmm....

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/07/04/st ... 221200.htm

Could you post a small and relevant snippet for our benefit or perhaps the title of the news item so there is some context? Thanks.

Sure Marten,

Brief Description:
I was reading more about CV Charles De Gaulle when I saw a referencing article about them flying CAP off the Indian Coast with the Americans.
That led me to the article in the Hindu which I found to be a very boastful account about the French Rafales flying CAPS and estabilishing a perimeter between the Indians and the Pakistanis so as to prevent any conflict with the American F-14 and F-18s.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


However I found it a bit cocky and I know that if an American CV (forget the French) was off our coast flying CAPS it would have made serious headline news at that time. I just wonder if this is some sort of French Manipulation of their and American patroling duties off the Paki and Iranian coasts (remember its 2002 and post 9/11) to support Operation enduring freedom in Afghanistan. Besides patrolling our coastline ??? That just seems so far fetched when the French refused to condemn the Pakistanis completely because they had their finger in both the pies or were trying to.

Anyhow the article was a fresh reminder that the French are the best at blowing their own trumpets.

[chackojoseph]

I wonder if the war breaks up, we will have more than one enemy to fight with.

[Rahul M]

ASP sahab, I really don't want to drag this on.

I've already explained more than once why your initial comment was considered offensive while the subsequent discussion was welcome. at the end of the day I've to take a call on what constitutes offensive in order to maintain forum decorum. it is past and I would request you to let it rest.

as for your comments

As to the second matter, you must take things in context. To list a few components and say that "There, DRDO has lots to do with this ship", is a bit silly. I mean sure DRDO has lots to do with many things that went into the ship. But I was talking about the concept and building of the ship, which was what the article posted to me by ChackoJoseph was about! By this coin, next, Russia will phone up and list every piece of eqpt they installed, and claim it is a Russian vessel?

this really doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
for one, DND no longer does the detailed designing. starting from either P17 or P15A kolkata (I forget which) it has started restricting itself to the draft plan and leaves the detailed designwork to the shipyards. secondly, what goes into a modern warship is as important as the hull itself and costs quite a bit more. the comparison with russia doesn't cut the mustard because they are not involved in system integration, their role is limited to providing the systems in black box form. unlike these DRDO/BEL systems where the brain of the ship itself, CMS etc is designed by them.
the overall work takes place under the supervision some very competent people from the navy but that in no way negates others' contribution.

[Wayne Arnold]

dear all,v should also not forget the LPD's for which the indian navy/GOI would be issuing a RFI shortly to some indian shipyards(as far as i've heard L&T,Pipavav & HSL) for the design and construction.In such case, d ship design for the LPD's wud have to be from a foreign vendor.Any idea which all foreign vendors are capable of providing such designs(i knw DCNS & Navantia)???

[Philip]

Russia is buying and building the Mistral from France.I would prefer the larger,extra deck,Juan Carlos from Spain.Oz is buying /building several of the Spanish LHPDs.

[Singha]

in a situation of limited funding, I would prefer the $$ flow to attack carriers, AAW DDG and ASW FFG ships first and foremost. there is no immediate need for us to have a large fleet of LPH ships unless we decide to customize one or two for a huge fleet of ASW helicopters to form a submarine hunting task force. the typical veritical assault/LST/LCAC thing for the USMC MEUs have little relevance to us at present...the IOR islands or our AN/Lacc islands are not under major threat.

in time that might change and we will respond. thats why I think IN is not pushing for large LPH/LPD ships.

[Samay]

Chinese businessman bids £5m for UK's HMS Invincible

He told the South China Morning Post that the bid - entered via his Zhuhai-based company Sunway Yacht Limited - was purely commercial.

If successful in buying the carrier he told reporters he wanted to tow the vessel to Zhuhai and berth it at a marina he is building in the city. He said it would cost £11m to buy the Invincible, tow and convert it.

We should not loose it
From Wiki:

Name: INS Viraat
Builder: Vickers-Armstrong
Launched: 16 February 1953
Acquired: May 1987 (UK)
Decommissioned: 2019 (expected)[1]
Refit: April 1986, July 1999, August 2008-November 2009
Motto: Jayema Sam Yudhi Sprdhah (Sanskrit: "I completely defeat those who dare fight me")
Status: completed refit

HMS Invincible (R05)

Ordered: 17 April 1973
Builder: Vickers Shipbuilding Limited, Barrow-in-Furness, England
Laid down: July, 1973
Launched: 3 May 1977
Sponsored by: Queen Elizabeth II
Commissioned: 11 July 1980
Decommissioned: 3 August 2005
Homeport: Portsmouth (From August 2005)
Nickname: "Vince"[1]
Fate: Struck off; for sale[2]

By the time Naval LCA gets IOC, HMS (or INS) - Invinsible can be retrofitted as a dedicated platform for them

At least it is younger than INS Viraat

[sumshyam]

By the time Naval LCA gets IOC, HMS (or INS) - Invinsible can be retrofitted as a dedicated platform for them

I hope it would just be stupid to follow anyone else in their pursuit....! We already have many indigenous programs in the pipelines...navy also demanding a great degree of indigenous....so i hope we can focus more on that rather than something else...!

[Samay]

deleted

[Samay]

There is nothing blasphemous in this idea
If retrofitting INS viraat is justified then buying this younger aircraft carrier, even for small purpose is justified ..it will cost les than $20mn
We need Aircraft carriers more urgently than the chinese..

[Singha]

er, small problem sir - neither the viraat or invincible class can operate the N-LCA which needs arrested wire recovery.

[Samay]

It can be modified ?

[Sid]

It can be modified ?

Samay, sice ships are mostly built inside out its hard to modify them with completely new systems which they were not designed for.

Best example is Vikramaditya, where we went for complete re-cabling and installing almost everything new. You can see why its taking soo much longer to refit.

This HMS old-junk will be a complete replay of same story if we try to go down the same path.