Indian Naval Discussion

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 10 Jul 2011 01:45

Austin wrote:[url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/story ... 42612.html].... The CBMS, drawn up after an Indian warship captain fired at a Pakistani maritime reconnaissance aircraft, mandated that warships of both sides stay three nautical miles (six km) away from each other. ...

Any more details of this incident?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Jul 2011 09:16

Indian Navy plans to induct of new radar systems

"We are considering induction of shipborne precision approach radars to assist in recovery of fixed wing aircraft and helicopters during landing on aircraft carriers," officials said here.

They said the Navy has issued a Request for Information in this regard and has sought responses from global vendors.

arun · Post by **arun** » 10 Jul 2011 09:43

shukla wrote:Indian Navy plans to induct of new radar systems

"We are considering induction of shipborne precision approach radars to assist in recovery of fixed wing aircraft and helicopters during landing on aircraft carriers," officials said here.

They said the Navy has issued a Request for Information in this regard and has sought responses from global vendors.

Presumably the RFI put out by the Indian Navy for “Shipborne Precision Approach Radar” for Aircraft Carrier Operations is for equipping the IAC.

Excerpt from the "Official" RFI

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

SHIPBORNE PRECISION APPROACH RADAR

INDIAN NAVY IS CONSIDERING INDUCTION OF A ‘SHIPBORNE PRECISION APPROACH RADAR’ OF STATE-OF-THE-ART TECHNOLOGY. THE RADAR IS REQUIRED TO ASSIST IN RECOVERY OF AIRCRAFT (FIXED WING AND HELICOPTERS) DURING LANDING ONBOARD THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER………………

From the “View Document” link in the “Tender Document” section on this page:

Clicky

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 10 Jul 2011 09:51

India begins work on 2nd nuclear submarine

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Jul 2011 12:37

One report alone does not make a thesis! If you read seriou reports in mags like AWST,JDW,etc., you will find reports of the huge progress being made in modernising Rusia's aircraft industry which is full of nw orders from home and abroad.Thanks to large well-filled pockets due to oil revenues,the Russians are pouring in huge amounts of money into reubishing their armed forces.However,within the industry their are troublespots and what one must aprpeciate with the Russsians is that they are NOT covering up their problem areas and are firing incompetent or corrupt officials.has their ever been any similar such audit and accountability in the Indian defence setup? The DRDO is treated lik a "sacred cow",pardon the phrase,immune to delays,cost-overruns,etc.It is rpecisely because of this that the amred frces are compelled to find their weapon systems from abroad when the DRDO/PSUs cannot deliver.This is why Adm.Prakash said that the MMRCA decision was "right for the wrong reasons".

Now just take a close look at the "aircraft precision radar" global tender.IS radar tech something new to us? For decades we've been making HSA rdars for our warship and carriers,plu radars like Rajendra,etc.,etc.Why are we wanting to buy a foreign one now?Could we not have anticipated such a requirement a long time ago as we've been operating carriers for decades now,more than 50 years! The report about the second ATV makes a huge boast about us producing everything at home,sonars etc.
a "we don't need anything from abroad" attitude,but in the very same breath send out a request for pecision landing radars!

THhs clearly shows that the true fault lies with the lopsided Indian defence estblishment,dominated by babus and their cronies in uniform,smiled upon by the political bosses who manipulate the entire system to the detriment of the goal of indigenisation,while remainin technologially abreast of the curve through JVs,tie-ups with foreign entities. There are successes,but one still has ad-hocism and fire-fighting plaguing the entire strategy towards our defence procurement.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Jul 2011 12:40

From the article in Asian Age, X posting my comment from Arihant page:

"The reactor has been fabricated with the help of Russia."

For all those who want to move away from evil russkis when it comes to matters of defence, and how the buggers keep arm twisting poor yindoos, the above might serve as a good reminder. No point griping when India still needs such "help". A few extra bucks and some wrangling it might be, but Roosi goods are still much cheaper than western counterparts, moreover associated help of above nature makes Russia a very tempting partner.

Cm.

Why evil russkis help in such matter

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Jul 2011 17:11

[seriously OT]

Amazing.

Neither do rants ad nauseum make a post!!!

Also Russia can no longer be held as a standard for Indian PSUs to follow. Soviet may have been.

CM,

It is rather simple. Indian GoI/IA/IAF/IN did not come to the conclusion of issuing an international tender for Russian products in the Indian inventory over night. I too have posted an article (in the armour thread) that India has started building gun barrels for the T-90 because Russia has been an unreliable source. None of these are NRao's creations. BUT, one thing is for sure, 2011 has been the "prefect storm" year for India when it comes to Russian support for Russian products.

I am not sure why simple data points are not being picked up:
* India moving to non-Russian sources for assistance (yes I have heard of not putting all the eggs in the same basket - just that India did for decades with the SOVIETS and seem to have a bad experience with the RUSSIANS)
* Russians themselves going out of the country to buy products. Yes, it is a trickle. But it is a dent in the Russian capabilities
* Russia is pouring monies into ................. Yes, I have read those reports too. BUT, for the size of Russia, I just do not see the products they need to buy, to sustain the growth, being bought (I had mentioned SUs as a comparison and someone posted that RuAF has some 200+ SUs. On further investigation I found about 30-45 being the range of what Indian MKIs are, the rest were pedestrian Su-27. I would like better research to assist me). One product I am trying to track is how many jet trainers they actually induct. My feeling is not as many as they need to
* Over a period of time the complains against Russia, in India, has ONLY increased - culminating in the international tender for spare for Russian products in Indian inventory
*Finally, PLEASE place ALL events on a timeline. IT DOES HELP. So:

1) Russian help on Arihant nuclear reactor. YES, Russia did help. PM ALSO said so, in no uncertain terms. In public. Yes, I did read that too.

BUT, when did that happen? I do not know, but I suspect somewhere around 1990-95 the help came around. It should take about 10 years for such assistance to mature. Now fast forward to 2011: India has having problem acquiring one of two Akulas and per one report (at least - I KNOW it does not make a thesis

) IN has declined to pay for the second one. So, what gives MC? I do not know about others. The only decent conclusion I can come to is that "Russia" in 2009+ is NOT the same as the Russia of 1990-95. Simple. Then, if it is not the same, what is the diff? Russia has degraded is my conclusion. It is that simple. Nothing more nothing less.

Now ask the question: can the Russians be relied upon TODAY to provide the SAME assistance they did provide a decade ago? I think not. And this is NOT a knock on them - JUST AN OBSERVATION on my part. When they cannot supply tires for the MKI ...........

2) Some Indian PSU has started building gun barrels for the T-90, because - as the article states - Russia is not a dependable supplier. Now, THINK. For an INDIAN PSU (most of whose management should be fired!!! for being inept - granted) to make a substitute gun barrel takes TIME (chalta hai). For that PSU to make a gun barrel and supply it to the IA in 2011, I would think the thinking/effort started in 2009, if not earlier. So, my conclusion is that the Russians became a problem around 2005-2007, it took Indians about 2 years to wake up and another 2 years to make these barrels and announce what a great achievement it is

So, MC, next time please place the data point you want to post on a time line. Thx.

In a way I am very, very, very glad that the Russians are being a problem. This is a Kargil of sorts, and, as I have said many a times, India NEEDS such events for India to wake up. And, as we can see India is reacting. And, for that we have no one else to thank but the Russian friends.

Perhaps, IF it were not for the Russians India would not have bought the C-17 or the C-130s. Or the P-8I. Or ............

Perhaps, IF it were not for the Russians India would not have bought the Arjuns. Or a substitute gun barrels for the T-90. Or ..........

I collect data points and am not swayed by emotions. I have always said that India will NOT get what she wants in the FGFA. Let us see. Hope I am wrong. But I doubt that. Russia has been on a slide lately and she normally does not disappoint.

(I have a 5 hour drive. Will see ya on the other side.)

[/seriously OT]

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jul 2011 17:51

every time paki ships comes close, we should send some probe torpedoes and get them stuck on these ships to get a permanent track & coordinates, that also helps with incident identification and ship signature.

so, we could actually encourage them to do so, till we perfect these probes. Next, all we need is to push the buttons.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 10 Jul 2011 19:44

To add to NRao

its not like even the help on the Arihant was smooth and hurdle free. The russians extracted their pound of flesh as mentioned by one of the naval chiefs.

I am sure there were lots of moments fo frustration there too but because of the nature of that business it has been kept quiet

I also think the Russian degradation may vary from business to business (armor, airfraft, naval etC)and its have become so rotten that even the Russian def ministry is starting to get fed up.

The order for French equipment and the some public cries for maybe thinking Eu tanks are the beginnings of that reaction

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jul 2011 01:04

I wish NR would list the problems that we've had with the western suppliers in equal spirit,the absence of which leads me to question his motives.We don't need to list out our new-found " strategic partner's " decades of arms supplies to Pak,with which it used against India nor the vast sums of aid that have propped up its perfidious military! For Uncle Sam,"all is forgiven",Pak can continue to shaft us with US supplied key weaponry like F-16s,Orions,Perry class FFGs,missiles infinitum,et al,but Russia,which has never sold Pak anything truly worthwhile which could hurt us and is supplying us with their very latest tech in terms of the FGFA,hypersonic-Brahmos,nuclear-sub reactor designs,and other classified eqpt. is to be condemned and dumped.A splendid judgement from NR's kangaroo court!

So he would have us abandon Russia,without which the ATV would not have hit water,ignore the years of delay of the Scorpenes and the huge extra costs of staying with the project,turn a blind eye to the problems with the Hawk trainer procurement,junk Sea Kings supplied with the Trenton-not to mention the accident aboard that killed a number of Indian sailors,the same problem it had had before in US service,CAG reports about Israeli Derby's failing to deliver on performance,absurd costs of upgrading M-2000s,(I suppose this is not blackmail) and ignoring the shoddy performance of our own PSUs ,where the sub-performance LCA MK-1 has yet to be inducted after 30 years of development (remember part due to US sanctions after P-2),only 5 of these can be built per year,and a basic trainer cannot even be built so we've chosen the Pilatus,etc.,etc.

While I have been objective and listed out problems with Russian orders,plus reports of Russian frustration of the same,the Nelsonian eye to similar situations with western suppliers "perfect storms",from anti-Russian hawks is not only amusing but carries little conviction.Fortunately,despite the problems that we have with Russia-and one is not sweeping them under the carpet,the GOI has decided to stay with Russia in a long-term mutual relationship that benefits both nations.The just spoken desire to "quadruple trade" too indicates India's sentiments which fortunately differ from the view of some harsh critics of the relationship.

As I've said before,if our goal is indeed to usher in as much indigenisation as soon as possible,then a revamp of the DRDO and PSUs is vital,plus a complete reassessment of our national strategy which appears to be non-existant! We are calling for international suppliers of carrier aircraft precision approach radars,as if it were an afterthought after 50 years of operating carriers,a 3-carrier programme in the pipeline and after decades of building our very own radars as well! Admittedly,the tech curve sometimes moves faster than our own efforts can to even catch up with it and we have to seek assistance from outside.It is churlish to condemn Russia which is the only nation willing to supply us with the key tech assisting us in our indigenous efforts like the ATV/Akula,FGFA,Brahmos,successful local production of SU-30MKIs,T-90s,etc.,while the US will not even supply us with an AESA radar unless we sign grovelling agreements compromising our soveregnity!

The PRC has made it's goals very clear,to supplant the US by 2050,what is India's?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Jul 2011 01:10

While I have been objective and listed out problems with Russian orders

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Jul 2011 01:12

Its a shame you have to bring the PSUs and LCA

I am going to take a break because I will say something which will cause the Bradmins to hellphyr me

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Jul 2011 02:09

IF "would list the problems that we've had with the western suppliers" would force the Russians to supply tires for MKI I certainly will. These discussion will never change the fact that in 2011 the support provided by the Russians for their own products is bad - there is no other way to put it, the proof lies in the fact that the GoI has allowed the MoD to float an international tender for parts so that Russian supplied products can be maintained to defend the country!! Enough said.

in equal spirit

I am, for the time being, going to ignore this Paki-like thinking.

On:

decades of arms supplies to Pak

May be you should list what the US has supplied to India in the spirit of being equal. Like being able to listen to talks between Pasha and Karzai?

Objective!!!!!! What is that?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 11 Jul 2011 02:14

Philip wrote:.........and ignoring the shoddy performance of our own PSUs ,where the sub-performance LCA MK-1 has yet to be inducted after 30 years of development (remember part due to US sanctions after P-2),only 5 of these can be built per year....

Do you really believe Tejas development started in 1981?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Jul 2011 02:20

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Philip wrote:.........and ignoring the shoddy performance of our own PSUs ,where the sub-performance LCA MK-1 has yet to be inducted after 30 years of development (remember part due to US sanctions after P-2),only 5 of these can be built per year....
Do you really believe Tejas development started in 1981?

Ignore him. He'll claim absolutely anything to defend the russkies.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 11 Jul 2011 06:10

@NRao ^^^: OT in naval discussions but related. What happens with FAKPA

/FGFA etc? That's an even bigger rabbit hole

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 11 Jul 2011 07:17

Good morning, ’Nam

As always, however, there’s a glitch. Even though Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his national security adviser (NSA) Shiv Shankar Menon are reportedly for an Indian naval presence in the Vietnamese seas and want India to be a staunch strategic partner of Vietnam, the until recently defence secretary, Pradeep Kumar, was pressing the brakes. Fuelling the innate over-caution of his minister, A.K. Antony, he argued that such a stance would needlessly “provoke” the Chinese and, therefore, is avoidable. It is a remarkable characteristic of the dysfunctional Indian system that despite the Prime Minister’s and the NSA’s support for this initiative, a defence ministry bureaucrat can so easily gum up the works. Hopefully Mr Kumar will be succeeded by someone a bit more on the ball.
Tit-for-tat is something Beijing appreciates better than the apologetic do-nothing tone of statements on China usually emanating from the ministry of external affairs and the generalist defence ministry civil servants. The Indian government should long ago have responded to the nuclear missile-arming of Pakistan by China by equipping Vietnam with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles and the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile, as I have been advocating the past 15 years. The fact that the Indian government has not done this and, indeed, not accorded top priority to militarily advantaging Vietnam in every possible way, indicates the essential infirmity in India’s strategic thinking. China has used Pakistan to try and contain India to the subcontinent. It’s time India returned the compliment and cooperated with Vietnam, which does not shrink from a fight, to contain China to its immediate waters. Acting on the basis that Vietnam constitutes India’s first line of defence will ensure that, among other things, the bulked-up Chinese Navy is bottled up well east of the Malacca Strait.
The author is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Jul 2011 07:33

Raoji,

Sorry if I stirred up a Hornet's nest - not my intention. The point behind that post was simple - until the day comes that India can build critical tech on its own, moving away from phoren maal is just about impossible, least of all in areas where strategic programs are concerned.

As you notice, India is indeed supplanting russia (and understandably so) where it can with things such as maintenance/support, SCM etc. However, when it comes to extra sensitive or critical hardware, there is simply no one else who will deal with India, period. Not in terms of technologies shared and definitely not in terms of price. There is a reason India signed a JV on the Pakfa with Russia, nuke sub leases don't come from any other place either. Interestingly enough, the Asian Age article points out that the reactor for the second sub is being built with Roosi help (not just the first). IOWs, it is not as though all russian help/cooperation came only decades ago. Quite importantly, a decade is not that far off in time, and within that time, at least a couple of critical projects, which have surely helped Indian defence preparedness have come with russian cooperation - MKI, cryo engines, and Brahmos. All stellar successes. Yes, the T90 situation has been aggravating, and so has the Gorshkov, but the general trend has been positive because despite all the acrimony, said issues seemed to be resolved. Even with MiG, despite all the inefficiencies associated with that particular unit, the upgrade is well on its way, and at a fraction of the cost of the M2k upgrade, which despite India's "booming" economy, still seems rather unaffordable.

Philip does have a point - delays are rather normal in defence purchases out so why single out Roos? Cost escalations are not a novelty either, again why single out roos? Such things happen, and will continue to do so until india truly becomes independent. Such griping becomes stale rather fast esp. when it is well known that in most projects where there have been difficulties, India is getting hardware that it simply cannot from elsewhere. Be it Brahmos, MKI, n-subs, Gorshkov - you name it. It would be really interesting to see how many non russian projects experience problems (as a percentage of total sales with a given supplier). First, India has hardly been able to afford top notch prods from western countries, and even those come with heavy costs and delays.

It is not for nothing that India still chooses to go with russia on critically important new priojects such as Pakfa. If things were so awful, they could have very well tried to do something with Saab or even LM - but we don't see that. Not even now, when the world seems to be at India's doorstep. It is really interesting because it seems India engages the US (where roosi type SCM problems seem licked at an extravagant cost) v.gingerly - nothing super critical on which the tip of the spear would totally depend. Only now are they engaging in transports (an area where they already have some strong capacity).

So while there is reason to be frustrated (admittedly), it is not as though the whole thing has gone sour - the relationship is simply moving to the next level, where JVs and more cooperation (rather than pure buyer-seller relationship) will be more common. It will take time but I feel, they can succeed. Pakfa is a good example of this.

CM

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Jul 2011 07:33

Raoji,

Sorry if I stirred up a Hornet's nest - not my intention. The point behind that post was simple - until the day comes that India can build critical tech on its own, moving away from phoren maal is just about impossible, least of all in areas where strategic programs are concerned.

As you notice, India is indeed supplanting russia (and understandably so) where it can with things such as maintenance/support, SCM etc. However, when it comes to extra sensitive or critical hardware, there is simply no one else who will deal with India, period. Not in terms of technologies shared and definitely not in terms of price. There is a reason India signed a JV on the Pakfa with Russia, nuke sub leases don't come from any other place either. Interestingly enough, the Asian Age article points out that the reactor for the second sub is being built with Roosi help (not just the first). IOWs, it is not as though all russian help/cooperation came only decades ago. Quite importantly, a decade is not that far off in time, and within that time, at least a couple of critical projects, which have surely helped Indian defence preparedness have come with russian cooperation - MKI, cryo engines, and Brahmos. All stellar successes. Yes, the T90 situation has been aggravating, and so has the Gorshkov, but the general trend has been positive because despite all the acrimony, said issues seemed to be resolved. Even with MiG, despite all the inefficiencies associated with that particular unit, the upgrade is well on its way, and at a fraction of the cost of the M2k upgrade, which despite India's "booming" economy, still seems rather unaffordable.

Philip does have a point - delays are rather normal in defence purchases out so why single out Roos? Cost escalations are not a novelty either, again why single out roos? Such things happen, and will continue to do so until india truly becomes independent. Such griping becomes stale rather fast esp. when it is well known that in most projects where there have been difficulties, India is getting hardware that it simply cannot from elsewhere. Be it Brahmos, MKI, n-subs, Gorshkov - you name it. It would be really interesting to see how many non russian projects experience problems (as a percentage of total sales with a given supplier). First, India has hardly been able to afford top notch prods from western countries, and even those come with heavy costs and delays.

It is not for nothing that India still chooses to go with russia on critically important new priojects such as Pakfa. If things were so awful, they could have very well tried to do something with Saab or even LM - but we don't see that. Not even now, when the world seems to be at India's doorstep. It is really interesting because it seems India engages the US (where roosi type SCM problems seem licked at an extravagant cost) v.gingerly - nothing super critical on which the tip of the spear would totally depend. Only now are they engaging in transports (an area where they already have some strong capacity).

So while there is reason to be frustrated (admittedly), it is not as though the whole thing has gone sour - the relationship is simply moving to the next level, where JVs and more cooperation (rather than pure buyer-seller relationship) will be more common. It will take time but I feel, they can succeed. Pakfa is a good example of this.

CM

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 11 Jul 2011 08:56

Agreed CM

All the countries, we buy our arms from, are going to upset us. Err... maybe not Brazil and to a lesser extent, Israel.

And we are going to upset them in return, for a variety of reasons.

WE have to navigate these problems. The chinese do it by stealing? The pakis by begging and subterfuge.

The flip side to these problems is we have to get as much out of these sales to make us comfortably self sufficient. And let us acknowledge the fact that we are trying?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jul 2011 11:21

I thionk that CM has put it perfectly.View the entire realtionship holistically and do not judge by one or two problematic deals alone.In any case there is already a precedent of penalties levied for the delayed Talwars to go by if the GOI feels that a penalty must be imposed.It is a classic case of the Chivas ad,is the bottle "half empty" -to the pessimist,or "half full" -to the optimist? There is yet another category ,that of the over-optimist who says that actually the bottle should be "half size"!

I however agree with many who say that until we allow Indian industry to tender for defence wares ,we will always be dependent upon imports and suffer from the erratic performance of our DRDO and PSUs who have no competition within the country. Why not indeed ? Why should we only buy from foreign private suppliers? Surely Indian heavyweight corporate giants like L&T,Tatas,Mahindras,etc., can churn out several items for every service? I know of one small private Indian dockyard that earlier supppplied its wares for the IN and CG and also exported its items,but in recent times,all the large orders for small fast craft for the CG and IN seem to be for imports when this yard can easily deliver the same.We should liberate Indian industry and ask it to start supplying aero-engines,marine engines,etc.There are many examples of Indian industry helping our space/missile programme.Such examples should be encouraged ,in fact special funding facilities and preferential treatment given to them just as western nations subsidise their own arms industries.

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 11 Jul 2011 11:27

I am not sure if you guys know this:
According to my sources the INS Satpura commissioning date is set on Aug 28.(Could be 20th also cuz phone reception was not that great.)

jai · Post by **jai** » 11 Jul 2011 12:28

Folks, at best we may be speculating based on public reports. How do we know that these cost escalations are not being mutually engineered to pay our friends for some technology help that can not be made public ?

Philip is right no one else is giving us so much equipment with our customizations and at the kinds of costs that our friends are - look at Bhramos, mig 29k, su 30 mki's, Vikram, akulas, ATV support - and the costs of these and you will know what I mean. Sure they are now extracting their pound of flesh, so what, who is not - as long as we import, every exporter to us will.

If we are ready to pay market rates to the Americans, French and everyone else, why do we shrink when Russians demand better prices ? After all the cold war is over and why should they be doing us any any favors - it's still business at the end of the day. I think we need to understand these realities before abusing Russians un- necessarily. Their leadership is on record on their commitment for better relationship with us and the recent reports of their president scalping the Russian industry on delays is very indicative of their desire to fix what needs to be fixed there. We need to stop reacting emotionally to every news of delay. Indeed, in the two decades that I have been following Indian defense developments I do not recall any indigenous projects that were delivered on time either and so are most - if not all imported projects.

mody · Post by **mody** » 11 Jul 2011 12:47

Does anyone have any info about the weapons fit for the P15B class vessels?
I would love to see the P15B class vessels increase in size to 8,000 plus ton category with the following weapon load:
16 Brahmos/Brahmos-II anti-ship missiles maybe even 24 missiles, if possible.
24 Nirbhay LaCM
64 Barak-8/Barak NG/MRSAM
36 Barak -II
4 Torpedo Tube (2 for port, 2 starboard side)
100 mm Rapid fire gun
2 or 4 nos. AK-160 CIWS guns
Anti Sub Rocket Launcher
2 Anti Sub Helicopters

We can have a DDG centered Strike Force with the P15B vessels.
The task force can comprise of

1 P15B DDG
1 P17A FFG
1 Talvar Class FFG
1 P28 ASW Corvette
1 P25A Missile Corvette
1 Replenishment Tanker.

The P25A would need to be upgraded, to include the latest noise reduction Technic being used in P28 class of vessels, as apart form the Tanker all the other ships incorporate a fair deal of stealth features.

The strike force would have a 6 helicopters, 2 on the P15B, 2 on P17A, and 1 each on Talwar and P28. One of the helicopters can be Ka31 providing above the horizon eyes and targeting info and the rest can be for Anti-Sub role. Such strike force provides for an excellent anti-ship and anti-sub capability, combined with a reasonable SAM cover and limited land attack capability.

We should have 4 such strike forces, apart from the 2 carrier battle groups to really rule the Indian Ocean.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Jul 2011 12:52

Can anyone explain the rationale behind the P-17s being built without integral ASW weapon sytems other than MBUs ,or am I wrong? There appear to be no torpedoes whatsoever,barring what the ASW helos can carry,which will not be able to operate in rough weather.Even the smaller Talwars carry ASW torpedo launchers behind flush shutters amidships.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jul 2011 13:09

Philip they would have torpedo amid ship in triple TT launchers , if you check the pictures they do have what looks like flush shutter like arrangement just below the funnel which would open up while launching Torpedoes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Sortie.jpg

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 14:34

I would love to see the P15B class vessels increase in size to 8,000 plus ton category with the following weapon load:
16 Brahmos/Brahmos-II anti-ship missiles maybe even 24 missiles, if possible.
24 Nirbhay LaCM
64 Barak-8/Barak NG/MRSAM
36 Barak -II

I think a more reasonable arrangement would be:
8 brahmos in inclined tubes in a hollow area amidships pointing to right and left at 90' hidden by the stealth sides (a lot of western and chinese ships use this mode)
8 nirbhay LACM
64 barak NG
16 AAD-Lite for ultra long range kills on LRMP/awacs (SM-6-mki)

36 barak2
3 x next-gen CIWS

the nirbhay and AAD-lite should be in a UVLS to mix and match the loadout.

such a ship would definitely be in the type45/burke weight category..8000-9000t

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Jul 2011 15:30

CM ji,

No hornets nest at all. Just presenting data points.

There are many flaws in your post - because, again, you have not made a time line. But let me post a few rebuttals - need to run to office.

1) After that long holistic post, is the Indian parts/spares problem created by the Roos solved? I am inclined to think not. (You are patently confusing two totally different issues here). Let me know YOUR answer to that question (on spares) - yes/no. Thanks

On one more point, I will try and address the rest in the PM:

It is not for nothing that India still chooses to go with russia on critically important new priojects such as Pakfa. If things were so awful, they could have very well tried to do something with Saab or even LM - but we don't see that.

The PAKFA project was started somewhere between 1995-2000. At THAT time Indo-Russian relations were a lot more "stable". Somewhere between THEN and 2005ish is when India bought into this PAKFA. Also, please note that the FGFA effort with the Russians is not fully funded, unlike the MKI. I suspect - yes speculation on my part - India is hedging, and for good reason.

On LM/SAAB: I have not followed up, but the last I heard (want to say Sept/Oct of 2010) ADA wanted to rope in SAAB for the AMCA. The significance is that the AMCA is the plane after the FGFA. Or - hate to do this, but it is part of this topic - I have NOT heard/read that ADA would rope in the Russians for the AMCA. Not my intention to throw the Roos under the bus - just trying to emphasize a point.

And, finally, the very recent trend in a LOT of products India has been buying has gone to non-Russians - MMRCA being the largest one. I am sure it is for good (non-political) reasonS - even if some do not believe that there is good reason.

Unless you can let me know otherwise, Indian armed forces have shown a leaning away from Russia in the past few years.

(BTW, Roos - I thought were Aussies.)

L8r.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Jul 2011 19:44

NRao: Good one.

2) Some Indian PSU has started building gun barrels for the T-90, because - as the article states - Russia is not a dependable supplier. Now, THINK. For an INDIAN PSU (most of whose management should be fired!!! for being inept - granted) to make a substitute gun barrel takes TIME (chalta hai).

This behaviour of withholding crucial tech is not an exception but typical of Russians dealings. The point is they won't be explicit when you are getting into the agreement. You only come to know during later periods. Due to political support at higher level and so called strategic partnership, these "misdemeanours" were glossed over.

If there is any "chalta hai" attitude it is not with Indian PSU. The blame must fall on MoD and Russians. In this particular i think IA should also share the blame.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Jul 2011 20:20

Rao garu,

There are many flaws in your post - because, again, you have not made a time line. But let me post a few rebuttals - need to run to office.1) After that long holistic post, is the Indian parts/spares problem created by the Roos solved? I am inclined to think not. (You are patently confusing two totally different issues here). Let me know YOUR answer to that question (on spares) - yes/no. Thanks

Timeline? Partly there in last post. Biggest issues with Roos (Russia in Hindi) came about after the break up of SU. Still a number of deals were signed within a decade of this debacle (around 1999) most of which have borne fruit as of today. Reg. your question - I would think that the supply problems have been resolved partly - not entirely. IIRC, IAF Migs had major issues before, not so now - the fulcrums and bisons seem to be doing OK. Not too many issues re. the MKIs, ditto with the 29K (so far).

On one more point, I will try and address the rest in the PM:

The PAKFA project was started somewhere between 1995-2000. At THAT time Indo-Russian relations were a lot more "stable". Somewhere between THEN and 2005ish is when India bought into this PAKFA. Also, please note that the FGFA effort with the Russians is not fully funded, unlike the MKI. I suspect - yes speculation on my part - India is hedging, and for good reason.

I think you have that wrong - India officially joined only about a couple of years ago. THings were not much different then, in fact much R&D over Gorky took place at that time. Gorky was considered the Flagship project bet the 2 countries - and many, even the CNS had something negative to say about it - BUT India still made a commitment of $ 30 billion for this project. IIRC, half the development cost is India's, and it has committed for $ 5 bill already! No hedging, India is in it.

And Pakfa is not the only project, look up space projects too (manned missions and lunar orbiter)! Like I said, the relationship is maturing and codeveloment/JVs are more the norm now - nothing wrong there. Some russkis are even talking of taking it to a more strategic level - jointly produced N-subs for example.

On LM/SAAB: I have not followed up, but the last I heard (want to say Sept/Oct of 2010) ADA wanted to rope in SAAB for the AMCA. The significance is that the AMCA is the plane after the FGFA. Or - hate to do this, but it is part of this topic - I have NOT heard/read that ADA would rope in the Russians for the AMCA. Not my intention to throw the Roos under the bus - just trying to emphasize a point

.
I have not heard of this, but a foreign collab might be a good idea. However, this underlines 2 points imho - 1) India still is not confident to go it alone (and until this changes, things will tend to remain the same), and 2) there is always a tendency/strategy to diversify, which means no Russian prods. Is it any wonder that the AMCA does not have Ruski involvement when the other gen 5 project has deep russian lines? This is a sound strategy - so was MMRCA - India wants to diversify but this does not mean the Indo-Rus tie up is failing OR that India is fed up with Rus. Even when India was faar more dependent on Russia, it still chose to keep the indigeneous LCA program completely devoid of the Russia. Ideally, at present India would want a 45:55 western:russian product mix.

And, finally, the very recent trend in a LOT of products India has been buying has gone to non-Russians - MMRCA being the largest one. I am sure it is for good (non-political) reasonS - even if some do not believe that there is good reason.

See above. But it remains that while much has gone elsewhere, the biggest commitment is still the Pakfa. Add to that additional MKIs (80 since 2007), plus additional order of MiG-29K, and it does not seem half bad. Re. the MMRCA, Russia never stood much of a chance, even Aroor knew about this - the IAF needed to diversify, and rightly so, remember the original requirement was for the French M2K, and as of now, the French have a rather decent chance at it. India is diversifying but not really moving away from its traditional sourcing strategy, at least not at the pace seem to think.

CM.

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 11 Jul 2011 20:26

Austin wrote:Philip they would have torpedo amid ship in triple TT launchers , if you check the pictures they do have what looks like flush shutter like arrangement just below the funnel which would open up while launching Torpedoes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... Sortie.jpg

I don't think that's not the torpedo launchers as you are suggesting. The torpedo launchers are just below the Command and Control room.
The one that you are suggesting stores a life boat.

sum · Post by **sum** » 12 Jul 2011 08:38

Russia delays delivery of three more warships

Wait for the Indian Navy to acquire Russian-made warships seems like a long one, as three stealth frigates due from the Russians likely to exceed the scheduled delivery date.

In July 2006, New Delhi decided to purchase three Krivak class stealth frigates from Moscow under a Rs 5200 crore contract. The contract is actually a follow up order on three similar warships known as INS Talwar, Trishul and Tabar, which the Navy purchased in the 1990s at a cost of Rs 3800 crore.

The follow-on order is unlikely to meet its delivery schedule, a naval source said adding that the delay could be in the range of a few months. “INS Teg is unlikely to join the Navy this year,” he said.

The first ship in the follow-on contract INS Teg was launched in the water in November, 2009 followed by INS Tarkash, which was launched in June, 2010. The last one INS Trikhand was launched only in May, 2011.

Reviewing the delivery schedule of the stealth frigates is on the agenda of the Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma who had embarked on a six-day tour to Russia on Monday.

The delay happened because of Moscow’s decision to shift the ship-building exercise to Yantar shipyard near Kaliningrad, sources said. Even though Yantar had built Krivak class ships in the past, there was a gap leading to a break in warship production. The three Talwar class ships were built at Sevmash shipyard.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 13 Jul 2011 09:26

INS Satpura delivered to Indian Navy

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 13 Jul 2011 09:41

INS Koswari Fast Attack Craft joins Indian Navy

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 13 Jul 2011 09:41

INS Viraat can serve Navy till 2018: Captain

Even if Sea Harriers are not available we can still use Viraat for purely ASW role

prithvi · Post by **prithvi** » 13 Jul 2011 10:16

chackojoseph wrote:INS Satpura delivered to Indian Navy

good news... pics?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 13 Jul 2011 11:03

chackojoseph wrote:INS Koswari Fast Attack Craft joins Indian Navy

Health pace of induction of small vessels coupled with larger platforms like frigates and destroyers is a healthy sign, these smaller boats are very essential for coastal defense and thus freeup larger platforms for deployment in deeper waters farther from the mainland.
When are our proj25 corvettes getting inducted? GRSE seems to be slower with larger platform while churning our smaller platforms at a brisk pace.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 13 Jul 2011 11:06

chackojoseph wrote:INS Satpura delivered to Indian Navy

CJ, what does delivered mean? Ready for IN trials pending commissioning or is it ready for commissioning? INS sayadri should also be ready correct?
This frees up Mazagon docks to focus on the Kolkatta class ships, currently all three ships are under fitment!!!

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 13 Jul 2011 12:19

X-posting from newbie thread:

Modern Landing Platform Dock (LPD) - Has both Well Deck for troops & equipment carriage/deployment and Hangar & Flight Deck
Modern Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) - Has both Well Deck for troops & equipment carriage and Hangar & Flight Deck

So is the difference between the two only that, in case of LPD the emphasis is on troops & equipment /deployment, where as in a LHD it is the aviation facilities that have more emphasis? Hence LPD has more larger well deck whereas LHD bigger hangar?

Generally, most amphibious assault fleets have LPD & LHD, therefore is it possible to come up with a single design so that we can have a cheaper fleet?

Vasu · Post by **Vasu** » 13 Jul 2011 12:22

chackojoseph wrote:INS Koswari Fast Attack Craft joins Indian Navy

Photo in The Hindu.

The ship was commissioned by Lt. Gen Bikram Singh, GOC-in-C, Eastern Command.